NEW  PUBLICATION. 
Neander's  History   of  the    Christian  Reli 

GiON,  during  the  first  three  Centuries.    Thin  3Vo. 

No.  1,  pp.  96,  price  25  cents.    Philadelphia:  James 

M.  Campbell  &.  Co.  JVlay,  1843.    For  sale  by  N. 

Hickman. 

We  are  gratified  to  find  that  this  valuable  and  cheap 
publication  is  presented  to  tiie  public  on  good  paper, 
and  in  legible  type:  thus  proving  that  cheapness  and 
convenience  may  be  combined.  We  hope  this  is  an 
indication  that  the  present  generation  will  be  spared 
(ioin  the  destruction  ofeye-sight  which  has  been  pie 
dieted  as  the  consequence  of  reading  the  miserable 
type  of  many  modern  cheap  publications. 

The  work  before  us  is  N'o.  1  of  the  Biblical  Cabinet; 
and  the  volume  of  N^ander's  liistory  will  be  completed 
in  five  numbers,  at  a  cost  of  one  dollar  and  twenty-five 
cents.  The  English  copy  costs  six  dollars  and  twen- 
ty-five cents.  Other  standard  works  will  succeed 
this. 
JThiawork  of  Dr.  Neander.  which  is  translated 

PIUNCETON.  X.  J. 


Neander,    August,    1789-1850. 
The   history  of   the   Christiarf 
religion   and   church  during 


1  — 

does  not  wisli  lor  accu rate 
of  the  Christian  lieii^ion  ai 
three  Ceiituiies 


.eiisf"  o!  ine  m.'IoTy" 
(Jhurcc,  during  the  first 
The  grain  of  raustu.d  ;ieed,  planted 
the  Aposiolic  age,  has  become  a  aiitthty  tree  on 
whose  Iruit the  nations  live,  and  by  whose  Branches 
they  are  sheltered.  The  reader  will  find,  in  the  re- 
cital of  the  early  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  an 
argument  in  support  of  the  divinity  of  its  origin.  It 
was  introduced  into  the  world  without  the  attractions 
of  pomp,  or  the  support  o!  power;  and  did  not  con- 
strain the  judgment  of  men  by  offering  them  "The  tri- 
bute or  the  sword."  Wrapped,  at  first,  in  swaddling 
clothes  and  laid  in  a  manger,  it  gradually  developed 
the  vigor  of  manhood,  and  th^  purity  of  heaven.  The 
worshippers  of  the  lalse  gods  of  Greece  and  Rome  op- 
posed the  progress  of  the  new  religion.  But  the  re- 
sults of  every  succeeding  persecution,  armed  with  im- 
perial power,  alibrded  additional  proof  that  the  blood 
of  the  martyrs  became  the  seed  of  the  Church.  The 
religions  of  Greece  and  Rome  were  buried  beneath 
the  ruinsol  tlieir  civil  and  political  institutions.  The 
religion  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  survived;  anti  when  the 
sign  appeared  in  Heaven,  "By  this  thou  shalt  con- 
quer," it  ascended  the  throne  of  the  Cie:-ars.  Genius 
and  learning  iiave  conspired  for  its  overthrow;  and  the 
rock  remains  nnsliaken.  The  insii'ious  pen  of  the 
historian  has  seemed  to  praise,  while  it  aimed  to  de- 
stroy; but  the  simple  histories  of  the  "Fishermen  of 
Galilee"  will  be  received  by  the  world,  alter  existing 
t-mpires shall  have  declined  and  iailcn,  and  new  fly- 
nasties  shall  have  arisen.  In  vain  did  Voltaire  pro- 
claim to  the  world,  "Crush  the  wretch."  Eveiy  op- 
poser  of  this  Divine  Teacher  shall  be  brought  to  ac- 
knowledge, with  the  dying  and  apostate  dulian,  ."O 
Galih-ean!  thou  hast  conquered."  C. 


^?- 


fui/  : 


J^  .  0/(^^2*-*.  s 


^p-^^j* 


^c^<^Vw^M<*^^ 


^-'*-*»  ***"^.vC 


-^N^//^ 


THE   HISTORY 


CHRISTIAN  RELICtION  AND  CHURCH, 


THE  THREE  FIRST  CENTURIES. 


BY  DR.  AUGUSTUS  NEANDER. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN, 

BY    HENRY    JOHN    ROSE,  B.D. 

RECTOR    OF    HOUGHTON    CONQUEST,  AND    LATE   FELLOW    OF   ST.  JOHN's    COLLEGE,  CAMEEIDGE. 


IN  ONE  VOLUME, 

CONTAINING 

THE     introduction;     the     history    of   the     persecutions     of    CHRISTIANITY;     AND 

THE    HISTORY   OF    CHURCH    DISCIPLINE,  AND    OF    CHRISTIAN    LIFE    AND    WORSHIP; 

THE    HISTORY    OF    CHRISTIAN    SECTS    AND    DOCTRINES,  AND    AN    ACCOUNT  OF 

THE    CHIEF    FATHERS    OF   THE    CHURCH. 


P  1]  i  1  a  b  c  1  p  I)  i  a  : 

JAMES  M.  CAMPBELL  &  CO.,  98  CHESTNUT   STREET. 
NEW  YORK:  SAXTON  &  MILES,  205  BROADWAY. 

Stereotyped  by  C.  W.  Murray  ^-  Co. 

1843. 


THE  TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE 


The  history  of  the  Christian  Church,  especially  ia  the  earlier  periods  of  existence,  is 
a  cheering  subject  for  the  contemplation  of  a  Christian  heart.  It  supplies  a  commentary, 
which  cannot  be  mistaken,  on  the  promise  of  our  Lord,  that  He  would  be  with  his  dis- 
ciples even  to  the  end  of  the  world.  (Matt.  xxviii.20.)  The  difficulties  against  which 
Christianity  had  at  first  to  struggle,  only  serve  to  prove  the  overwhelming  might  of  the 
arm  which  sustained  it.  It  was  to  be  expected  that  an  age  of  corruption  should  put  forth 
all  its  powers  to  crush  that  religion  which  denounced  and  combated  it.  The  progress 
which  Christianity  made  in  spite  of  this  opposition,  constitutes  one  of  the  chief  points 
of  interest  belonging  to  the  earlier  periods  of  ecclesiastical  history.  The  working  of  that 
leaven,  which  is  destined  in  God's  good  time  to  leaven  the  whole  lump,  is  seen  most 
definitely  at  that  season,  when  the  world  was  exchanging  its  paganism  for  Christianity.* 

Let  any  man  read  the  first  sixteen  chapters  of  Gibbon,  and  then  turn  from  that  melan- 
choly record  of  blood  and  crime  to  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  during  the  same 
period.  He  will  then  acknowledge  that  there  was  beneath  that  stormy  tide  of  passion 
and  ambition  an  under  current  silently  advancing,  whose  calmer  and  purer  waters  came 
to  light,  Avhen  once  that  troubled  tide  had  passed  away.  He  will  see  principles  of 
action,  and  rules  of  life,  the  strongest  and  the  purest  ever  given  to  man,  making  their 
way  against  all  the  persecutions  of  power,  by  their  own  intrinsic  worth,  and  by  the 
power  which  sustained  them  from  above.  It  is  in  this  point  of  view,  among  many 
others,  that  the  early  history  of  Christianity  is  fraught  with  such  deep  interest  to  man, 
and  it  is  to  be  considered  one  of  the  great  aims  of  such  an  history  to  develope  this  progress 
of  the  Church  clearly,  and  delineate  it  with  accuracy. 

It  would  be  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  this  Preface  to  discuss  the  merits  or  the  de- 
merits of  other  ecclesiastical  histories,  but  it  may  be  allowable  to  direct  attention  to  this 
particular  point,  as  connected  with  the  work  of  Dr.  Neander.  To  develope  this  progress 
of  Christianity  faithfully,  requires  that  the  historian  should  not  only  possess  the  learning 
and  the  impartiality  which  are  needed  for  all  historical  inquiries;  but  that  he  should 
unite  profound  and  extensive  views  of  human  nature  with  what  is  of  even  more  im- 
portance, warm  feelings  for  the  higher  parts  of  the  Christian  scheme,  and  an  eye  well 
practised  to  discern  the  dealings  of  God  in  the  world.  I  cannot  but  think  that  the  learned 
and  amiable  author  of  this  history  unites  these  qualifications  in  no  common  degree;  and 
I  believe  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  become  acquainted  with  his  works  without  feeling 
reverence  for  the  high  qualities  both  of  head  and  heart  which  adorn  their  author.  The 
present  portion  of  the  history  bears  testimony  to  his  candour  and  acuteness,  his  diligence 
and  his  fidelity.  His  judgment  also  in  disentangling  the  historical!  from  the  fictitious 
in  the  Acta  Marlyrum  cannot  fail  to  strike  any  one,  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  compare 
the  details  of  this  history  with  the  original  of  the  Acta  Martyrum,  as  edited  by  Ruinart. 

To  this  meed  of  praise,  high  as  it  is,  I  think  every  impartial  reader  will  consider  the 
author  to  be  entitled,  but  still  this  avowal  by  no  means  binds  us  to  the  acceptance  of  all 
the  views  propounded  in  this  work.     I  feel  it  necessary  to  state,  that  in  many  of  them  I 

*  Every  man  at  all  arquainted  with  the  history  of  religion,  will  see  at  once,  that  the  history  of 
this  period  contains  much  that  is  interesting  to  all  ages,  because  the  controversies  of  all  ages  have 
been  nearly  the  same  in  substance,  though  varied  in  form,  and  in  this  period  the  germ  of  most  of 
them  will  be  discerned. 

t  It  has,  however,  been  observed,  that  in  another  part  of  the  subject.  Dr.  Neander  has  expressed 
far  too  favourable  an  opinion  of  Apollonitis  of  Tyana — a  man,  whose  very  existence  is  a  matter  of 
doubt,  and  whose  life,  as  set  forth  to  us  by  eulogists,  is  a  tissue  of  impostures.  See  Leslie,  Easy 
Method  with  the  Deists.  3 


iv  THE    translator's   PREFACE. 

cannot  at  all  concur.  The  author  has  embraced  them  honestly,  and  he  maintains  them 
with  a  zealous  love  of  truth,  and  in  a  truly  Christian  temper  of  charity ;  but  still  I  cannot 
accede  to  the  views  themselves,  nor  acknowledge  the  weight  of  the  arguments  brought 
10  support  them,  especially  those  which  relate  to  the  early  form  of  church  government, 
and  the  questions  concerning  the  Christian  ministry.  It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  these 
are  not  isolated  questions;  they  are  only  parts  of  a  larger  system  or  view,  which  seeks 
to  place  Christianity  in  an  improper  opposition  to  Judaism  in  respect  to  universality  and 
spirituality.  The  same  sort  of  view  which  induces  the  author  to  attribute  the  rights  of 
Christian  priesthood  to  every  Christian,  and  to  maintain  that  these  rights  gradually 
became  restricted  to  one  class  from  motives  of  convenience,  and  the  necessity  of  order, 
Sec,  leads  him  to  look  upon  all  days  as  LonVs  days,  and  to  consider  the  special  sanctifi- 
caiion  of  one  day  in  the  week  a  measure  of  convenience,  rather  than  a  precept  of 
Christianity.  The  view  taken  of  the  sacraments,  and  some  other  portions  of  the 
Christian  scheme,  is  greatly  affected  by  this  desire  to  represent  the  essentials  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  independent  upon  any  particular  and  external  observances.  In  a  great 
degree,  the  views  taken  of  these  matters  by  the  author  appear  to  arise  from  habits  of 
mind  which  are  admirable  in  themselves,  but  still  require  regulation,  to  prevent  them 
from  undue  excess  or  improper  application.  I  mean  his  fear  of  lowering  the  spiritual 
nature  of  Christianity,  by  giving  too  much  importance  to  its  forms — his  fear,  lest  the 
spirit  should  be  lost  in  the  form.  This  is  a  rational  fear,  and  a  just  ground  of  jealousy, 
but  the  question  is,  whether  it  is  justly  applied.  And  in  the  present  instance,  I  think  it 
has  improperly  led  Dr.  Neander  to  combat  the  notion  of  an  authoritative  ministry,  as  if 
it  savoured  of  the  Jewish  priesthood,  and  to  present  in  great  vagueness  much  which 
Christianity  distinctly  defines.* 

Now  one  thing  which  is  remarkably  striking  in  the  view  presented  by  Dr.  Neander 
of  the  early  government  of  the  Church,  is  its  indefiniteness  in  point  of  time.  In  the  first 
chapter  he  professes  to  treat  of  the  apostolic  times,  but  in  that  case  the  miraculous  gifts 
and  the  superintendence  of  the  apostles  themselves  would  appear  to  deserve  more  par- 
ticular notice.  They  are  two  elements  which  distinguish  this  period  from  every  other. 
If,  however,  it  be  meant  for  the  age  immediately  succeeding-  that  of  the  apostles,  it  must 
be  remarked  that  the  notices  of  this  age  are  very  scanty,  and  as  far  as  I  have  investi- 
gated the  question,  his  account,  which  admits  of  lay  elders  and  rejects  an  authoritative 
ministry,  is  not  warranted  by  those  notices,  and  still  less  by  the  accounts  of  the  next 
times,  of  which  we  have  a  more  accurate  knowledge.  To  descend,  therefore,  to  one  or 
two  particulars : — 

*  I  here  subjoin  an  extract  from  the  "British  Critic,"  enumerating  some  of  the  writers  who  treat 
on  the  question  of  the  ministry  : 

"  To  those  who  are  not  conversant  with  this  question  we  should  recommend  Bennel's  Rights  of 
the  Clergy,  (Lond.  1711.)  This  book  proves,  we  think,  decisively,  the  necessity  of  an  ordination 
by  minisTers,  although  it  does  not  enter  into  the  question  between  presbyters  and  bishops.  This 
latter  question  he  treated  in  his  work  on  Schism,  and  it  is  also  well  argued  by  King  Charles,  in  the 
letters  which  passed  between  him  and  the  ministers  at  Newport.  The  Jus  Divinum  Ministerii 
Evangclici,  also  argues  the  former  question  admirably.  Leslie's  little  tract  (on  the  Qualifications 
requisite  to  administer  the  Sacraments,)  and  Bilson's  large  treatise,  are  also  well  worthy  of  perusal. 
'I'he  former  of  these  coiitains  the  pith  of  the  episcopal  question  in  a  small  compass.  Slatyer's 
'  Original  Draught  of  the  Primitive  Church,'  is  said*  to  have  made  a  convert  of  Lord  Kin^,  against 
whose  work  on  the  Church  it  was  written.  Burscon^h,  Thorndike,  or  Potter,  might  also  serve 
the  same  purpose  as  the  above  works,  or  Daubeny's  '  Guide  to  the  Church.'  Any  of  these  books, 
but  especially  Bennet,  Leslie,  or  Burscough,  will  give  the  common  arguments  on  the  subject." 
On  the  (luesiion  of  the  priesthood,  as  savouring  of  Judaism,  see  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  Rook  iii.  % 
11.  v.  78.  There  are  also  some  admirable  remarks  on  this  subject  in  an  article  on  Dr.  Whateley's 
Errors  of  Romanism,  in  the  British  Critic  for  July,  1831. 

*  As  this  assertion  has  been  controverted,  it  may  be  proper  to  state,  that  I  wrote  the  artiele  which  is  here  quoted,  and 
at  the  same  time  to  give  the  autliorityon  whicli  the  assertion  was  made.  It  is  the  following  passage  from  the  Works  of  the 
Learned  for  17:19,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  the  words  of  the  Review  do  not  assert  the  fact,  but  simply  that  there  exists  a 
report  to  that  effect — "  is  said  to  have  made  a  convert  of  Lord  King,  &c." 

After  praising  Sir  P[eter]  K[ing]  as  a  lawyer,  and  mentioning  Ins  treatise  on  the  Church,  the  writer  proceeds  : — "  An 
an.swtr  was  made  by  a  very  karned  and  judicious  divine  to  this  Book  in  1717,  which  Sir  Pfetcr  King]  saw,  and  read  in 
MS.  before  it  was  printed  ;  and  he  had  it  in  his  power  to  prevent  the  printing  of  it  etTcclually.  if  he  nleaseij.  But  so  far 
was  he  from  that,  that  he  gave  up  his  own  book,  which  had  just  then  had  a  second  editiort,  without  asking  his  consent,  by 
one  Bell,  a  dissenting  bookseller,  thereunto  moved  by  the  party  ;  and  he  returned  the  MS.  with  thanks,  and  desired  it 
might  be  printed,  for  it  had  convinced  him  of  his  mistakes."     Works  of  the  Learned,  lor  Jan.  1739.     Vol.  v.  p.  21. 


THE    translator's    PREFACE.  V 

1.  With  regard  to  lay  elders  (see  1  Tim.  v.  17,  quoted  p.  190.)  The  passage  from 
Bishop  Bilson,  which  I  have  cited,  is  very  badly  worded,  but  as  it  was  impossible  to 
extract  his  commentary  on  it,  I  merely  took  the  shortest  extract  possible.  In  his  work, 
p.  131,  the  reader  will  find  strong  arguments  for  an  interpretation,  at  least  somewhat 
similar  in  substance,  though  differently  expressed.  The  most  obvious  interpretation 
certainly  appears  that  given  by  Dr.  Neander,  but  still  I  am  inclined  to  think  it  not  the 
true  one.  Mosheim  says,  that  he  acquiesces  in  it,  but  he  gives  and  supports  in  his  note 
an  entirely  different  interpretation.  He  makes  "  labouring  in  the  word,"  to  mean  ex- 
tending Christianity  among  heathens  by  labouring  to  convert  them,  and  distinguishes 
this  "labour"  from  that  of  teaching  the  converted  Church:  (Mosheim,  de  Rebus 
Christianorum,  p.  12G.)  He  also  admits  that  this  one  passage  is  not  sufficient  to  esta- 
blish the  existence  of  lay  elders,  that  they  had  ceased  almost  immediately,  and  that 
afterwards  none  were  made  presbyters  but  such  as  could  also  teach  the  Church. 

2.  With  regard  to  the  gifts  or  ;t*§'°"-"='''"*  of  Christians  (see  p.  188.) 

The  word  X'^V'^y-'^  's  used  sixteen  times  in  Scripture,  and  variously  applied.  If  any 
one  will  take  the  trouble  to  look  at  Rom.  xii.  6 — 8,  he  will  find  it  there  applied  to  (1.) 
prophecy;  (2.)  ministry,  {Stanona.-^  (3.)  teaching;  (4.)  exhortation;  (5.)  charity;  (6.) 
government;  (7.)  showing  mercy. 

It  has  been  contended  from  1  Pet.  iv.  9— 11,  that  all  gifted  brethren  should  be  minis- 
ters of  the  word,  and  preach  publicly  in  the  churches.  Now  I  can  see  in  this  passage 
only  a  general  exhortation  to  use  all  the  gifts  which  God  bestows  upon  us,  for  the  edifi- 
cation of  our  brethren;  and  in  the  interpretation  of  ver.  11,  Macknight  renders  it,  "  If 
any  man  speak  hy  inspiration,  let  him  speak  as  the  oracles  of  God."  It  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that,  during  this  time,  the  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit  were  manifested  by 
miraculous  effects ;  and,  therefore,  great  caution  is  requisite  in  applying  what  is  said  of 
those  times  to  our  own.  The  presbyters  were  the  public  ministers  in  the  assemblies, 
the  public  expounders  of  the  word  of  God,  they  were  from  the  first  appointed  by  impo- 
sition of  hands,  and  it  was  a  regular  office.  Now  in  order  to  make  out  the  argument  of 
our  opponents,  it  ought  to  be  shown  that  any  ordinary  gift,  or  a  capacity  for  teaching 
properly,  entitled  a  man  to  be  a  public  teacher,  and  take  the  place  of  the  presbyters 
without  qualifying  himself  for  that  office  in  the  regular  course,  to  which  other  presbyters 
submitted ;  namely,  ordination.  I  am  unable  to  discover  such  a  general  permission  even 
in  the  apostolic  age,  and  I  cannot  but  think  that  establishing  a  regular  ministry  with  the 
right  hand  to  be  contended  with,  perhaps,  or  superseded  by  another  irregular  ministry 
from  the  left  hand,  is  unlike  the  dealings  of  God  and  his  apostles.  That  these  gifted 
brethren  might  be  of  great  service  to  the  cause  of  Christ  by  activity  in  their  own  proper 
sphere — by  instructing  those  whom  they  could  instruct,  no  one  is  weak  enough  to  deny; 
but  this  is  not  the  point  contended  for.  It  would  seem  from  Dr.  Neander's  account, 
that  by  degrees  all  public  teaching  was  limited  to  ine  presbyters,  which  was  not  the  case 
at  first.  We  look  then  to  the  apostolic  age,  and  we  certainly  find  some  brethren  mira- 
culously gifted,  using  their  gifts  publicly  for  the  good  of  Christ's  Church,  though  not 
regular  ministers;  but  as  soon  as  the  Church  of  Christ  emerges  from  the  darkness  which 
hangs  around  the  immediate  post-apostolic  age,  we  find  every  thing  pretty  well  settled, 
and  a  regular  ministry  established.* 

The  episcopal  question  is  hardly  touched  upon,  for  the  points  which  are  concerned  in 
it,  would  require  separate  discussions  of  considerable  length  to  be  fairly  considered. 
One  or  two  works,  besides  the  great  works  of  Hooker  and  Taylor,  in  which  it  has  been 


*  In  makine;  ihese  remarks,  I  have  studiously  preferred  drawing  them  from  writers,  who  do  not 
agree  with  the  Church  of  England,  among  them  are  Macknight,  CoMinge,  (Vindiciee  Ministerii 
EvanseUci  Revindicatne,  p.  45 — 56.)  M.  Poole's  Quo  Warranto,  (chapter  entitled,  Gifted  Brethren 
no  Gospel  Preachers.)  These  two  last  treatises  arc  nearly  contemporary  with  Calamy's  "Jus 
Divinum  Ministerii  Evangclici,"  published  by  the  Provincial  Assembly,  1G54. 

t  Churchman's  History  of  Epi.scopacy ;  Slatycr.  (or  Sclater,  for  the  work  is  anonymous)  Original 
Draught  of  the  Primitive  Church;  Maurice's  Diocesan  Episcopacy:  Brokesby's  History  of  the 
Government  of  the  Church  during  the  three  first  centuries.  See  also,  my  brother's  "  Sermons  on 
the  Commission  of  the  Clergy." 

a2 


VI  THE  TRANSLATOR  S  PREFACE. 

argued  on  Ine  episcopal  side,  are  mentioned  in  a  note.  The  main  point  is  simply  this, 
whether  presbyters  had  originally  the  right  of  ordination.  The  limits  of  episcopal 
power  over  the  clergy  is  a  different  question,  and  the  part  of  Dr.  Neander  which  relates 
to  this,  will,  I  think,  be  read  with  considerable  interest.  Those  who  would  wish  to  see 
the  controversies  in  which  Cyprian  was  engaged,  handled  by  a  person  whose  notions  on 
this  subject  are  entirely  opposed  to  those  of  Dr.  Neander,  may  consult  the  work  entitled. 
Historical  Collections  concerning  District  Succession,  during  the  Chree  first  centuries. 
It  was  written,  I  believe,  by  one  of  the  Nonjurors. 

These  remarks  it  seemed  proper  to  make  on  the  important  subject  of  the  Christian 
Ministry,  and  in  making  them  I  trust  that  I  shall  not  be  deemed  guilty  of  presumption, 
but  simply  desirous  of  pointing  out  what  I  believe  to  be  true  and  salutary  in  the  author's 
work,  and  what  I  consider  erroneous.  It  will  not  be  desirable  to  enter  into  the  discus- 
sion of  the  other  points  at  the  same  length.  After  the  general  indication  I  have  made 
above  of  their  unsoundness,  as  it  appears  to  me,  I  must  leave  the  work  to  the  judgment 
of  the  reader.  The  Christian  tone  of  feeling  which  characterises  it,  and  the  beautiful 
development  of  the  progress  of  Christianity  against  persecution,  and  of  its  effects  upon 
the  social  life  of  the  world,  cannot  fail  to  obtain  their  due  share  of  approbation,  and  need 
no  praise  of  mine. 

But  it  may,  perhaps,  be  useful,  if  I  add  here  a  very  brief  synopsis  of  the  contents  of 
the  work,  so  as  to  show  the  plan  upon  which  Dr.  Neander  has  worked  in  this  portion 
of  his  history,  and  thus  to  methodise  it  more  conveniently  than  the  detailed  table  of  con- 
tents affords  us  the  means  of  doing.     This  is  the  course  pursued  in  the  history:  — 

INTRODUCTION. 
1.  General  view  of  the  heathen  and  Jewish  world  in  a  religious  point  of  view. 

Sectiox  I. — External  History  of  Christianity. 

1.  Its  propagation  during  the  three  first  centuries. 

2.  The  opposition  which  it  met  with  from  heathen  persecution. 

3.  The  opposition  to  it  by  controversial  writings. 

Sectiox  II. — History  of  the  Formation  of  the  Church. —  Church  Discipline  and  Church  Schism. 

1.  General  view  of  the  early  constitution  of  the  Church  and  its  changes,  until  it  assumed  a  form 
of  outward  unity  as  one  integral  body. 

2.  Church  Discipline — Excommunication  and  re-admission  to  the  Church. 

3.  History  of  Schisms  (as  distinguished  from  Heresies.) 

a.  Schism  of  Felicissimus  in  the  North  African  Church. 

b.  Schism  of  Novatian  in  the  Romish  Church. 

Section  III. —  Christian  Life  and  Worship. 

1 .  Christian  Life — Effects  of  Christianity  as  affectiong  social  and  domestic  life,  and  condition  of 
the  world  generally. 

2.  Christian  Worship: 

Places  and  times  of  worship — Single  acts  of  worship — Sacraments — Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  considered  as  acts  of  worship,  not  doctrinally  viewed. 

Section  IV. — History  of  the  conception  and  Development  of  Christianity  as  a  system  of 

Doctrines. 
1.  History  of  Sects. 

a.  The  Judaizing  Sects. 

b.  The  Sects  which  arose  from  the  mixture  of  Oriental  Theosophy  with  Christianity. 
(1.)    Gnostic  Sects. 

General  Remarks  on  Gnostic  Sects. 

Cerinthus — Basilides — Valcntinus — Ophites— Pseudo-basilidians — Saturninus — Tatian — 
Eclectics  as  e.  i^.  Carpocrates — Marcion — Appendix  on  the  Worship  of  the  Gnostics. 
(2.)   Manes  and  the  Manichees. 

Sectiox  V. — History  nf  the  Formation  of  Christianity  as  a  system  of  Doctrines  in  the  Catholic 
Church  which  formed  itself  in  opposition  to  the  Sects. 

1.  (a)  Realistic  disposition. 

(i)  Idealistic  disposition  in  the  Alexandrian  Church. 

2.  D<!vclopniciit  of  the  great  doctrines  of  Cliristianity  separately.  Theology — Anthropology — 
Christology — Doctrine  concerning  the  Church — Eschatology. 


THE    TRANSLATOR'S    PREFACE.  Vll 

3.  (1)  History  of  the  most  celebrated  Church  teachers :  Bamabus — Clement — Hcrmaa. 
(2)   Peculiar  characteristics  of  the  Church  teachers. 
a  In  Asia  Minor, 
jg  In  North  Africa. 
■y  In  Rome. 
/  In  Alexandria. 

I  have  now  finished  the  prefaratory  remarks  which  I  feel  called  upon  to  make  with 
regard  to  the  original  work ;  and  in  concluding  them,  I  must  again  express  my  high 
respect  for  the  author's  talents  and  learning,  and  for  what  is  far  above  talents  and 
learning,  his  Christian  temper  and  feelings.  In  translating  his  work,  I  think  the  cause 
of  truth  requires  me  to  express  my  dissent  from  some  of  his  views;  and  I  feel  assured 
that  the  candid  author  himself  would  be  the  last  person  to  disapprove  of  the  course  I 
have  taken. 

With  regard  to  the  manner  in  which  I  have  executed  my  humble  task  of  translation, 
it  is  for  others  to  judge,  not  myself.  I  have  only  endeavoured  to  transcribe  faithfully  the 
ideas  of  the  author,  and  in  words  approaching  as  much  to  his  own  as  possible.  In 
translating  a  work  of  imagination,  the  great  point  is  to  convey  the  spirit  of  the  original: 
in  translating  the  history  of  the  Church,  my  object  has  been  to  say  every  thing  which 
the  author  says,  and  nothing  whatever  which  he  does  not  say. 

With  regard  to  the  second  edition  of  this  first  volume,  I  must  merely  add,  that  it 
scarcely  differs  at  all  from  the  former,  with  the  exception  of  a  very  few  corrections, 
where  I  had  either  missed  the  sense  of  the  original,  or  where  I  thought  a  slight  alteration 
might  improve  the  faithfulness  of  the  version,  and  the  clearness  of  the  sense.  I  have 
constantly  compared  the  proof  sheets  with  the  original,  and  the  consequence  has  been 
the  very  few  alterations  to  which  I  have  just  alluded.  I  ought  perhaps  here  to  apologise 
for  the  few  fragments  of  notes  which  are  scattered  through  the  volume.  The  fact  is, 
that  I  do  not  pretend  to  give  any  notes  to  the  work  at  all,  but  have  merely  printed  a  few 
private  memoranda  made  in  the  course  of  reading  this  history,  because  I  thought  them 
likely  to  be  useful.  In  general  they  are  merely  calculated  to  facilitate  references  to  other 
editions  of  the  authors  here  quoted,  besides  those  used  by  Dr.  Neander.  I  trust  that 
they  may  be  found  of  use,  inasmuch  as  I  have  often  found  it  very  difficult  to  consult  the 
originals  of  passages,  simply  because  the  editions  were  different  from  those  which 
I  possessed. 

I  will  only  add,  that  as  I  hope,  ere  long,  to  publish  a  translation  of  the  succeeding 
volumes  of  this  history,  I  shall  feel  obliged  by  any  corrections,  or  by  any  suggestions, 
which  may  render  the  succeeding  volumes  more  valuable  and  more  acceptable. 

H.  J.  Rose. 

Houghton  Conquest,  1842. 


THE  AUTHOR'S  PREFACE. 


To  set  forth  the  history  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  as  an  eloquent  witness  to  the 
Divine  power  of  Christianity,  as  a  school  of  Christian  experience,  as  a  voice  of  in- 
struction and  warning  to  all  who  choose  to  hear,  which  speaks  to  all  ages  of  the  world 
— this  has  long  been  the  chief  aim  of  my  life  and  of  my  studies.  And  yet  at  the  same 
time  I  have  always  felt  the  deep  importance  of  such  a  work,  and  the  great  difficulty  of 
accomplishing  it  in  a  manner  which  should  answer  the  demands  of  knowledge,  and  at 
the  same  time  serve  these  great  practical  purposes.  Both  these  ends  are  intimately  con- 
nected; nothing,  which  will  not  prove  its  truth  before  the  judgment-seat  of  a  genuine,  un 
prejudiced  knowledge,  that  does  not  look  through  the  false  glare  of  a  philosophical  or  dog- 
matical school,  can  be  adapted  for  edification,  instruction,  and  admonition;  and  wherever 
knowledge,  occupying  itself  with  Divine  things,  and  their  revelation  and  development 
in  human  nature,  does  not  lose  itself,  by  the  mismanagement  of  human  perverseness, 
in  senseless  caricatures,  or  content  itself  with  a  lifeless  skeleton  of  facts,  it  must  neces- 
sarily lead  to  these  practical  results.  Knowledge  and  life  must  mutually  imbue  each 
other  with  the  spirit  peculiar  lo  each,  if  we  would  preserve  the  source  of  life  from  the 
manifold  contradictions  of  error,  and  knowledge  from  a  dead  and  empty  vanity. 

Although  I  felt  an  inward  call  to  such  an  undertaking,  yet  I  was  constantly  withheld 
from  the  execution  of  this  favourite  scheme,  which  had  so  long  occupied  my  thoughts, 
by  the  consciousness  of  its  importance  and  its  responsibility — especially  in  an  age  like 
the  present,  which  needs  so  much  the  aid  of  "Historia,  vita;  Magistra,"  to  find  a  sure 
and  certain  guide  amidst  its  multifarious  storms.  After  much  preparation  by  means  of 
works  on  detached  portions  of  ecclesiastical  history,*  I  was  at  last  induced,  by  many 
outward  and  inward  motives,  to  attempt  the  execution  of  a  work  which,  if  delayed  too 
long,  might,  perhaps,  remain  forever  unaccomplished. 

The  most  immediate  inducement  of  an  outward  nature  was,  that  my  very  excellent 
publisher  urged  me  to  undertake  a  new  edition  of  my  book  on  the  Emperor  Julian,  and 
to  supply  what  was  left  imperfect  in  it;  but  on  attempting  this,  I  found  that,  with  my 
present  views,  this  book  would  be  very  much  altered,  and  that  if  any  thing  at  all  was 
done  with  it,  I  must  entirely  rewrite  it.  I  then  began  to  think  that  I  would  first  publish 
the  ecclesiastical  history  of  the  three  first  centuries,  as  the  beginning  of  a  general 
history  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  the  encouragement  of  my  publisher  strengthened 
me  in  my  determination. 

I  therefore  begin  the  execution  of  this  plan  with  the  following  volume,  and  publish 
the  first  part  of  an  ecclesiastical  history  of  the  first  three  centuries,  which  shall  be 
followed,  "  Deo  volente,"  by  the  second  about  next  Easter.f  The  History  of  the 
Apostolic  Age,  as  a  whole,  appeared  to  me  too  important  to  be  interwoven  mto  this 
historical  work.  I  therefore  altogether  presuppose  it  already  executpd,  while  1  reserve 
the  publication  of  it  for  a  separate  book.J  May  He,  from  whom  all  that  is  good  and 
true  descends,  accompany  the  beginning  of  this  work  with  his  blessing,  and  grant  me 
the  power  and  the  proper  disposition  to  continue  it. 

In  conclusion,  I  beg  to  offer  my  most  heartfelt  thanks  to  all  the  friends  who  have 
given  me  their  assistance  during  the  printing  of  this  work,  and  particularly  to  my  dear 
young  friend,  M.  Singer  of  Silesia,  one  of  our  most  promising  students  in  theology. 
This  book  owes  much  to  his  kindness  and  diligence  in  correcting  ihe  press,  which  was 
often  attended  with  no  small  trouble  to  him.  I  have  also  to  thank  this  kind  friend  for 
the  table  of  contents,  which  I  hope  will  contribute  much  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  reader. 

A.  Neander. 

*  Among  these  we  may  mention,  I.  the  Denkwiirdigkeiten  aus  der  Geschichte  des  Christeii- 
ihums  und  des  Christlicheii  Lebcns  ;  Berlin,  1825.  Sections  first,  second,  and  third,  relate  to  the 
first  three  centuries,  and  serve  to  illustrate  the  first  and  third  sections. 

2.  GQiiPtischc  Entwickelung  der  Vornehmston  Gnostischen  Systcinen  ;  Berlin,  1818. 

3.  Aniignostikus  Geist  des  Tertullian  ;  Berlin,  1825. 

4.  A  work  on  Chrysostom  and  his  times. 

5.  St.  Bernard  and  his  times. 

6.  A  Life  of  our  Saviour. 

t  Neander's  book  was  originally  published  in  three  volumes. 

t  [It  has  now  been  published.  The  second  edition  of  it  has  been  translated  into  English  by  Mr. 
Ryland,  and  forms  two  volumes  of  the  Edinburgh  Cabinet  Library. — H.  J.  R.] 

(8) 


THE  HISTORY 


CHRISTIAN  RELIGION  AND  CHUECH, 


DURING  THE  THREE  FIRST  CENTURIES. 


INTRODUCTION. 

General  viexo  of  the  Slate  of  Religion  among 
the  Ilomans,  Greeks,  and  Jcii's,  at  the  time 
of  the  first  appearance  of  Christianity. 

Human  nature  bears  universally  the 
same  relation  to  Christianity,  inasmuch 
as  that  nature  remains  always  essentially 
the  same,  as  well  as  its  tendencies  to  evil 
and  to  good,  although  in  different  epochs 
the  active  development  of  those  tenden- 
cies appears  under  different  forms.  There 
are,  no  doubt,  in  the  general  history  of 
unregenerated  human  nature,  as  there  are 
in  the  life  of  an  unregenerated  individual, 
some  periods  in  which  its  godlike  quali- 
ties are  most  visibly  displayed,  and  others 
in  which  its  ungodliness  is  most  promi- 
nent; and  yet  a  deep  observer,  whom  ap- 
pearances do  not  deceive,  may  observe  in 
every  age  qualities  of  both  kinds  at  work, 
and  satisfy  himself  of  the  constant  iden- 
tity of  human  nature.  The  most  depraved 
times  are  not  without  some  contrast  of 
good  against  the  prevailing  evil,  and  on 
the  otlier  hand,  in  an  age  apparently  the 
most  glorious,  there  will  always  be  found 
some  offset  of  evil,  partly  in  those  very 
circumstances,  which  a  superficial  view 
regards  as  an  unmixed  manifestation  of 
good, and  partly  in  those  which  are  openly 
opposed  to  it.  In  every  age  Christianity 
proves  itself  the  only  means  by  which  the 
innate  evil  of  human  nature,  which  always 
remains  the  same,  though  it  is  at  some 
times  developed  in  open  excesses,  and  at 
others  in  hidden  wickedness,  can  be  puri- 
fied, and  human  nature  itself,  from  its  in- 
most foundations,  ennobled  and  exalted. 
In  every  age,  therefore,  Christianity  has 


the  same  relation  to  the  corruption  of  hu- 
man nature,  which  in  it  alone  can  find  its 
radical  cure.  The  declaration  of  Christ 
is  universally  proved  true,  that  he  came, 
not  for  the  sake  of  the  righteous,  but  for 
the  sake  of  sinners;  not  for  the  sound, 
but  for  the  sick.  So,  also,  although  the 
obstacles  opposed  to  that  attractive  power 
which  Christianity  exerts  upon  human 
nature  may  be  more  or  less ;  yet  Christi- 
anity never  entirely  fails  (unless  when  its 
preachers  mix  up  too  much  of  their  own 
with  it)  to  exert  this  attractive  power  of 
the  Divine  nature  upon  that  which  is  akin 
to  the  divine  in  humanity.  It  is  univer- 
sally seen,  that  those  come  to  the  Son  of 
God  whom  the  Father  draws  to  him  ;  the 
sheep,  who  know  the  voice  of  their  shep- 
herd when  he  calls  them,  and  follow  him. 
The  hindrances,  however,  which  oppose 
this  influence  of  Christianity  on  human 
nature  in  different  periods  appear  under 
different  forms,  but  they  all  rest  on  the 
same  foundation,  on  the  same  inclinations 
of  human  nature,  which  are  opposed  to 
Christianity,  and  over  which  it  must  tri- 
umph in  order  to  be  able  to  fix  its  roots 
in  the  depths  of  that  nature.  And,  again, 
it  is  constantly  seen  how  every  human 
affection  finds  its  place  in  Christianity,  a 
scheme  which  calculates  upon  the  deve- 
lopment of  the  whole  nature  of  man,  and 
how  the  opposite  and  conflicting  powers 
and  affections  of  man's  nature  can  be  re- 
conciled to  each  other  by  Christianity 
alone.  It  is  universally  proved  that 
Christianity  is  the  leaven,  destined  to 
leaven  the  whole  mass  of  human  nature. 

Now  that  which  may  indeed  be  per- 
ceived throughout  the  whole  of  ecclesi- 
astical history,  is  more  striking  and  pro- 
9 


10 


STATE    RELIGIONS. 


minent  in  those  periods  in  which  Chris- 
tianity took  a  peculiar  hold  of  human  life 
on  a  larger  scale,  and  this  is  particularly 
seen  in  the  season  at  which  Christianity 
was  at  first  revealed  in  the  life  of  man,  as 
the  means  of  reforming  and  healing  his 
nature;  for  the  unseen  hand  which  guides 
all  the  threads  in  the  development  of 
man's  nature,  in  the  plans  of  his  infinite 
wisdom,  had  so  guided  the  threads  of  this 
development  among  that  portion  of  the 
human  race,  in  which  Christianity  was 
first  to  take  root,  and  from  which  the  in- 
struction of  the  rest  of  mankind  was  to 
proceed,  that  they  were  exactly  calculated 
to  be  brought  together  by  the  power  of 
Christianity,  and  to  be  interwoven  toge- 
ther into  one  web.  The  consideration  of 
this  first  period  vvill  show  us  how  requi- 
site a  fundamental  remedy  for  the  evil  of 
human  nature  then  was,  and  how  the  want 
of  it  was  particularly  felt  in  those  regions, 
— it  will  show  us  what  is  calculated  to 
satisfy  the  moral  and  religious  wants  of 
human  nature,  and  how  Christianity  ex- 
actly supplied  this  need ; — it  will  show 
us  how  an  unconscious  desire  after  such 
a  religion  was  excited,  and  how  the  spi- 
ritual world  was  made  exactly  then  most 
capable  of  receiving  such  a  religion;  but, 
at  the  same  time,  how  powerful  obstacles 
of  a  peculiar  nature  also  opposed  the  re- 
ception of  Christianity  in  this  century; 
and,  lasdy,  it  will  show  us  that  a  religion 
like  the  Christian,  could  never  have  sprung 
forth  from  any  of  the  individual  religious 
tendencies  of  that  age,  nor  from  any  union 
of  them;  but,  at  the  same  time,  how  well 
the  opposing  religious  tendencies  of  that 
age  might  be  purified,  ennobled,  recon- 
ciled with  one  another,  and  united  by 
means  of  Christianity.  We  shall  first 
throw  our  glance  on  the  heathen  world, 
under  the  influence  of  the  Roman  and 
Grecian  nations. 

Religious  state  of  the  Roman  and  Grecian 
world,  in  Heathen  days. 

It  was  Christianity  which  first  present- 
ed religion  under  the  form  of  objective 
truth,  as  a  system  of  doctrines  perfectly 
independent  of  all  individual  conceptions 
of  man's  imagination,  and  calculated  to 
meet  the  moral  and  religious  wants  of 
man's  nature,  and  in  that  nature  every 
where  to  find  some  point  on  which  it 
might  attach  itself.  The  religions  of  an- 
tiquity, on  the  contrary,  consist  of  many 
elements  of  various  kinds,  which,  cither 
by  the  skill  of  the  first  promidgator,  or  in 
the  length  of  years,  by  the  impress  of  na- 


tional peculiarities,  were  moulded  together 
into  one  whole.  By  the  transmission  of 
tales,  half  mythical,  and  half  historical, 
by  forms  and  statutes  bearing  the  impress 
of  religious  feelings  or  ideas,  mingled 
with  multifarious  poems,  which  showed  a 
powerful  imaginative  spirit,  rugged  indeed, 
or  if  animated  by  the  spirit  of  beauty,  at 
least  devoid  of  that  of  holiness,  all  these 
varied  materials  were  interwoven  so  com- 
pletely into  all  the  characters,  customs, 
and  relations  of  social  life,  that  the  reli- 
gious matter  could  no  longer  be  separated 
from  the  mixed  mass,  nor  be  disentangled 
from  the  individual  nature  of  the  life  and 
political  character  of  each  people  with 
which  it  was  interwoven.  There  was  no 
religion  generally  adapted  to  human  na- 
ture, only  religions  fitted  to  each  people. 
The  divinity  appeared  here,  not  as  free 
and  elevated  above  nature,  not  as  that 
which,  overruling  nature,  might  form  and 
illuminate  the  nature  of  man ;  but  the  di- 
vinity was  lowered  to  ihe  level  of  nature, 
and  made  subservient  to  it. 

That  idea,  wdiich  dwells  in  the  heart  of 
man,  of  a  Divine  Being,  was  not  recog- 
nised as  a  revelation  of  an  Almighty  and 
Holy  God,  a  God  above  nature  and  of  free- 
will, and  received  as  a  finger-mark  which 
actually  pointed  to  him ;  but  this  notion 
was  transferred  to  all  the  great  masses, 
powers,  and  appearances  of  nature,  which 
worked  on  feeble  man  either  to  befriend 
or  fright  him  ;  and,  lastly,  to  all  which  ap- 
peared great  in  history  or  in  the  intellec- 
tual world;  and  often  without  any  refer- 
ence to  its  moral  or  immoral  character. 
Through  this  principle  of  deifying  the 
powers  of  nature,  by  which  every  exer- 
tion of  bare  pf>wer,  even  though  immoral, 
might  be  received  among  the  objects  of 
religious  veneration,  the  idea  of  holiness 
which  beams  forUi  from  man's  conscience, 
must  continually  have  been  thrown  into 
the  back-ground  and  overshadowed.  As 
long  as  a  certain  simplicity  of  life  and 
manners  existed  among  a  people, — as 
long  as  the  political  and  social  life  was  in 
its  purity  and  power, — so  long  also  might 
a  religion,  interwoven  into  every  social 
relation,  retain  its  life  and  vigour;  and 
the  moral  feelings,  awakened  by  civil  and 
social  intercourse,  might  attach  them- 
selves to  that  which  was  religious  in  the 
national  religion,  and  ennoble  it.  Now 
this  was  especially  the  case  among  the 
Romans,  while  the  republic  was  in  full 
vigour;  for'  among  them,  with  all  their 
miserable  superstition,  religion  took  rather 
a  political  and  moral  cast,  than  as  among 


ESOTERIC  AND  EXOTERIC  RELIGION. 


11 


the  Greeks,  a  character  in  which  the  re- 
finements of  art  were  joined  with  those  of 
an  aesthetic  system,  a  character  which  in 
natural  religion  is  likely  to  prove  danger- 
ous to  morality.*  The  old  lawgivers 
were  well  aware  how  closely  the  main- 
tenance of  an  individual  state  religion  de- 
pends on  the  maintenance  of  the  individ- 
ual character  of  the  people,  and  their  civil 
and  domestic  virtues.  They  were  well 
aware  that  when  once  this  union  is  dis- 
solved no  power  can  restore  it  again. 
Therefore  we  find,  especially  in  Rome, 
where  politics  were  the  ruling  passion,  a 
watchfulness  after  the  most  punctilious 
ohservance  of  traditional  religious  ceremo- 
nies, and  a  jealous  aversion  to  any  inno- 
vations in  religion. 

Men  of  thought,  however,  must  always 
have  attained  to  the  perception,  that  in  tlie 
traditional  religions  of  a  people,  truth  and 
falsehood  must  be  intermingled.  The 
consciousness  of  their  religions  nature, 
developed  by  tlie  influence  of  their  rea- 
son, must  have  tauglit  them  to  distinguish 
the  foundation  of  religion  from  the  super- 
structure of  superstition.  The  belief  of  a 
divine  origin  of  all  existence  is  a  first 
principle  in  man's  nature,  and  he  is  irre- 
sistibly impelled  to  ascend  from  Many  to 
One.  This  very  feeling  showed  itself 
even  in  the  polytheism  of  national  reli- 
gions, under  the  idea  of  a  Highest  God, 
or  a  Father  of  the  Gods.  Among  those 
who  gave  themselves  up  to  the  conside- 
ration of  Divine  things,  and  to  reflection 
upon  them,  this  idea  of  an  original  unity 
must  have  been  more  clearly  recognised, 
and  must  have  formed  the  centre-point 
of  all  their  inward  religions  life  and 
thought.  There  always  accompanied, 
therefore,  the  polytheism  of  the  national 
religions  of  antiquity,  a  certain  doctrine 
of  the  unity  of  God ;  "although,  in  general, 
this  doctrine  was  unable  to  elevate  itself 
above  the  principles  of  natural  religion. 
It  usually  appeared  only  as  an  accompa- 
niment to  the  polytheism  of  the  national 
religion,  a  conception  of  religion  imder  a 
different  form,  and  with  a  different  spirit; 
the  one  a  conception  of  nature  from  the 
consideration  of  the  multitude  of  powers 
at  work  in  her;  and  the  other  from  that 
of  the  unity  which  revealed  itself  in  the 
operation  of  those  powers.  But  under 
all  circumstances,  the  idea  of  this  unity 
appeared  something  too  abstract  and  ele- 


•  See  the  remarkable  intimation  of  Dionysius 
of  Halicamassus  conccrnin<j  the  difference  be- 
tween the  Roman  and  the  Grecian  rehgion.  Ar- 
chsEolog.  II.  18. 


vated  to  be  brought  within  the  compre- 
hension of  the  gross  ami  sensuous  many. 
The  imaginaton  of  the  people  was  to  be 
engaged  with  the  numerous  powers  and 
energies  flowing  forth  from  that  one 
Highest  Being,  while  to  the  contempla- 
tion of  that  unity,  only  a  small  nuujber 
of  exalted  spirits,  the  initiated  leaders  of 
the  multitude,  (which  in  religious  mat- 
ters was  accounted  a  minor)  could  elevate 
themselves.  The  one  God  was  the  God 
of  philosophers  alone.  Thus  Plato  said, 
in  the  true  spirit  of  the  ancient  world, 
that  it  is  hard  to  find  out  the  Father  of 
all,  and  that  it  is  impossible,  when  you 
have  found  him,  to  make  him  known  to 
all ;  and  so  the  Brahmins  of  the  East  Indies 
stdl  think.  A  spiritual  conception  of  the 
whole  of  religion  was  closely  connected 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God, 
and  both  together  formed  an  esoteric 
system  of  doctrines  attached  to  the  exo- 
teric, symbolic  religion  of  the  people. 
All  pure  spiritual  knowledge  of  religion 
was  considered  as  the  peculiar  possession 
i  of  a  small  number  of  initiated  men ;  it 
seemed  impossible  to  communicate  this 
knowledge  to  the  multitude,  under  which 
name  we  must  include  not  only  the  lower 
classes,  but,  in  general,  all  those  who 
were  occupied  with  any  practical  busi- 
ness. Certainly,  the  spiritual  perception 
of  religion,  in  order  to  be  conceived,  duly 
understood,  and  soundly  employed,  sup- 
posed a  certain  stage  of  intellectual  culti- 
vation, and  a  certain  direction  of  the  whole 
inward  life,  and  of  the  whole  habits  of 
thinking;  and  no  means  were  at  hand  to 
produce  these  qualifications,  and  thu3  to 
work  on  the  inmost  foundations,  and  the 
centre-point  of  human  nature.  Hence, 
the  ruling  opinion  of  all  the  thinking  men 
of  antiquity,  from  which  all  religious 
legislation  proceeded,  was,  that  pure  reli- 
gious truth  could  not  be  proposed  to  the 
multitude,  but  only  such  a  mixture  of  fic- 
tion, poetry,  and  truth,  as  would  serve  to 
represent  religious  notions  in  such  a 
manner  that  they  might  make  an  impres- 
sion on  men,  whose  only  guide  was  their 
senses.*  The  principle  of  a  so-called 
fraus  pia  was  prevalent  in  all  the  legisla- 
tion of  antiquity.  The  great  historian 
Polybius,  says,  (B.  xvi.  c.~^12.)  "As  far 
as  it  serves  to  maintain  piety,  we  must 
pardon  some  historians,  if  they  do  relate 
miraculous  stories."  As  this  same  Poly- 
bius saw  in  the  religion  which  was  so 

•   [See  Warburton's  Alliance,  Book  i.  ch.  iv. 
p.  45.  in  Quarto  edition  of  his  works. — H.  J.  R.j 


12 


NO  FREE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  MAN'S  MORAL  AND  SPIRITUAL  NATURE. 


interwoven  into  all  the  piiblic  and  private 
relations  of  the  Romans,  and  in  the  super- 
stition which  was  connected  with  it,  the 
most  eminent  cause  of  the  truth  and  hon- 
esty by  which  they  were  distinguished  in 
all  their  intercourse  with  other  nations, 
and  the  source  of  the  prosperity  of  their 
stale,  he  therefore  defends  the  Roman 
legislators  from  the  reproach,  that  they 
had  introduced  so  much  superstition 
among  mankind,  and  says, — '■^K  a  state 
could  be  formed  wholly  of  wise  men, 
perhaps,  such  means  would  not  be  requi- 
site. But  as  the  people  are  giddy  and 
full  of  evil  desires,  there  remains  no  o^her 
resource  than  to  keep  the  multitude  in 
check  by  the  fear  of  something  unseen, 
and  by  terrors  arising  from  this  sort  of 
tragic  representation."  (vi.  56.)  This 
observer  of  human  nature,  who  saw 
deeply  into  it  by  means  of  the  light 
of  nature,  and  to  whom  the  light  of  Di- 
vine wisdom  was  alone  wanting,  clearly 
perceived  that  the  eartlily  order  of  civil 
society  cannot  be  maintained  as  an  inde- 
pendent arrangement,  and  can  only  be 
maintained,  when  it  is  held  together  by  a 
higlier  bond,  connecting  human  aftairs 
with  heaven  ;  but  how  miserable  would 
be  the  case  of  mankind,  if  this  bond  could 
only  be  united  by  means  of  lies :  if  lies 
were  necessary  in  order  to  restrain  the 
greater  portion  of  mankind  from  evil ! 
And  what  could  religion  in  such  a  case 
effect  ?  It  coidd  not  impart  holy  dispo- 
sitions to  the  inward  heart  of  man;  it 
could  only  restrain  the  open  outbreaking 
of  evil,  that  existed  in  the  heart,  by  the 
power  of  fear.  Falsehood,  which  cannot 
be  arbitrarily  imposed  on  human  nature, 
would  never  have  been  able  to  obtain 
this  influence,  had  not  a  truth.,  which  is 
sure  to  make  itself  felt  by  human  nature, 
been  working  througli  it,  had  not  tlie  be- 
lief in  an  unseen  God,  on  whom  man 
universally  feels  himself  dependent,  and 
to  whom  he  feels  himself  attracted,  hud 
not  the  impulse  towards  an  invisible 
world,  wliich  is  implanted  in  the  human 
heart,  been  able  to  work  also  through  this 
covering  of  superstition.*  In  this  point 
of  view,  with  all  the  appearances  of  poli- 
tical freedom  in  antiquity,  how  little 
could  that  free  development  of  spiritual 
and  moral  powers,  which  human  nature 
requires,  have  existence,  when  tlio  greater 
jiart  of  mankind,  given  up  to  blind  super- 
stition, were  obliged  to  submit  to  be  led 


•   [See  Stillingfleet,  Orig.  Sacr.  Book  I.  c. 
vi.  vii— H.  J.  R.] 


b)'  lies  at  the  hands  of  a  few  who  had  the 
monopoly  of  truth.  And  these  wise  men 
themselves,  who  believed  that  they  were 
elevated  above  the  multitude,  who  needed 
no  such  artificial  terrors,  who  saw  that 
mankind  can  only  be  happy  by  the  estab- 
lishment of  moral  order,  who  had  plea- 
sure after  the  inward  man  in  the  holy 
law  for  its  own  sake,  could  they  then,  if 
they  really  probed  their  own  hearts,  say 
that  their  iuM'ard  feelings  entirely  har- 
monised with  this  holy  law;  did  they 
feel  nothing  within  them  of  that  power 
of  evil,  whose  outbreakings  among  the 
multitude,  uncontrolled  by  any  refine- 
ments of  education,  they  believed  it  neces- 
sary to  restrain  by  the  aid  of  a  higher 
power  ?  Let  us  compare  with  the  above 
expression  of  Polybius  the  opinions  of 
some  thinking  men  who  lived  in  the 
century  in  which  Christianity  itself  ap- 
peared. 

The  geographer  Strabo  (see  B.  i.  c.  2. 
p.  36,  ed.  Casaubon)  thinks  that,  in  the 
same  manner  that  mythical  tales  and 
fables  are  needful  for  children,  so  alstl 
thpy  are  necessary  for  the  uneducated  and 
uninformed,  who  are  in  some  sort  children, 
and  also  for  those  who  are  half-educated, 
(TTETraf^Eyju.Ei'oi/i/t.ET^iw?)  for  even  with  them 
reason  is  not  sufficiently  powerful,  and 
tliey  are  not  able  to  free  themselves  from 
the  habits  they  have  acquired  as  children 
(}.  e.  of  loving  fables.  Sec.)  This  is,  in- 
deed, a  sad  condition  of  humanity,  when 
the  seed  of  holiness,  which  can  develope 
itself  only  in  the  whole  course  of  a  life, 
cannot  be  strewn  in  the  heart  of  the  child, 
and  when  mature  reason  must  destroy  that 
which  was  planted  in  the  early  years  of 
infancy  !  When  holy  truth  cannot  form 
the  foundation  of  the  future  development 
of  life  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  childish 
consciousness !  He  then  continues  thus: — 
"  The  great  mass  of  the  inhabitants  of 
cities  are  excited  to'  good  by  means  of 
agreeable  fables,  when  they  hear  the  poets 
narrating  in  a  fabulous  manner  the  deeds 
of  heroes ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the 
labours  of  Hercules  or  Tiieseus,  or  the 
honors  bestowed  on  men  by  the  gods, 
or  when  they  see  these  mythical  events 
represented  by  painting  or  statuary ;  and 
they  are  deterred  from  evil  by  narrations 
or  pictures  of  the  j)unishments  inflicted 
by  tlie  gods  ;  for  the  great  mass  of  women, 
and  the  promiscuous  multitude  of  the 
people,  cannot  be  led  to  piety  by  philoso- 
phical reasoning,  but  for  that  purpose 
superstition  is  requisite,  which  cannot  be 
.supported  without  miraculous  stories  and 


THEOLOGIA  PHILOSOPHICA  ET  CIVILIS. 


prodigies."*  The  thinking  Roman  states- 
man, also  of  the  time  at  which  Chris- 
tianity appeared,  as  Varro,  for  instance, 
distinguish  between  the  theologia  p/dloso- 
p/tica  and  the  t/ieologia  civilis,  which 
contradicts  the  principles  of  the  former, 
as  Cotta  in  Cicero  distinguished  between 
the  belief  of  Cotta  and  the  belief  of  the 
Pontifex.  The  philosopher  required  in 
religion  a  persuasion  grounded  on  rea- 
soning— the  citizen,  the  statesman,  fol- 
lowed the  tradition  of  his  ancestors  with- 
out inquiry.  Suppose  now  this  tlieolog'ia 
cilhUs  and  this  theologia  pJulosophica  to 
proceed  together,  without  a  man's  wishing 
to  set  the  opposition  between  the  two  in 
a  very  clear  light  to  himself,  and  that 
the  citizen  and  the  statesman,  the  philo- 
sopher and  the  man,  could  be  united  in 
the  same  individual,  with  contradictory 
sentiments,  [a  division  which  in  the  same 
man  is  very  unnatural,)  so  that  he  might, 
perhaps,  say  :  Philosophical  reason  con- 
ducts to  a  different  result  from  that  which 
is  established  by  the  state  religion ;  but 
the  latter  has  in  its  favor  the  good  fortune 
which  tlie  state  has  enjoyed  in  the  exer- 
cise uf  religion  handed  down  from  our 
ancestors.  Let  us  follow  experience, 
even  where  we  do  not  thoroughly  under- 
stand. Thus  speaks  Cotta,  and  thus  also 
many  Romans  of  education  (see  below) 
in  his  time,  either  more  or  less  explicitly. 
Or  perhaps  we  may  suppose,  that  men 
openly  expressed  this  contradiction,  and 
did  not  scruple  to  assign  the  pure  truth 
to  the  theologia  philosophical  and  to  de- 
clare the  theologia  civilis  only  a  matter 
of  politics,  as  Seneca  does,  when  in  his 
book  Contra  Superstitiones  he  says : — 
'"  We  must  pray  to  that  great  multitude  of 
common  gods,  which  in  a  long  course  of 
time  a  multifarious  superstition  has  col- 
lected, with  this  feeling,  that  we  are  well 
aware  that  the  reverence  shown  to  them 
is  a  compliance  rather  with  custom,  than 
a  thing  due  to  the  actual  truth.  All  these 
things  the  philosopher  will  observe,  as 
something  commanded  by  the  law,  not  as 
a  thing  pleasing  to  the  gods."  How 
miserable  for  the  philosopher,  if  he  had 
human  feelings,  to  be  obliged  to  stand  a 
cold  hypocrite  there,  where  men  are 
gathered  together  to  exercise  the  highest 
and  noblest  privileges  of  their  heart.  So 
Plutarch,  out  of  the  fulness  of  an  honest 
heart  (non  posse  suaviter  vivi  sec.  Epi- 
curum,   c.   22.),   exclaims, — "He   feigns 


•  See  the  contrast  exhibited  below  in  the  first 
eflects  of  Christianity. 


13 


1  prayer  and  adoration  from  fear  of  the 
multitude !  And  he  utters  words  which 
I  are  against  his  own  conviction;  and 
!  while  he  is  sacrificing,  the  priest  who 
slays  the  victim  is  to  him  only  a 
j  butcher!" 

In  the  East,  which  is  less  subject  to 
I  change  and  fluctuation,  where  tranquil 
1  habits  of  life  are  more  common,  and 
I  where  a  mystical  spirit  of  contemplation, 
accompanying  and  spiritualising  the  sym- 
bolical religion  of  the  people,  was  more 
prevalent  than  an  intellectual  cultivation, 
opposed  to  it,  and  developing  itself  inde- 
j  pendently,  it  was  possible  that  an  esoteric 
,  and  an  exoteric  religion  should  proceed 
hand  in  hand  without  change  for  many 
centuries.  But  it  was  otherwise  with  the 
more  stirring  spirits  and  habits  of  the 
West.  Here  this  independently  proceed- 
ing development  of  the  intellect  must 
'  have  been  at  open  war  with  the  religion 
of  the  people,  and  as  intellectual  culture 
I  spread  itself  more  widely,  so  also  must  a 
j  disbelief  of  the  popular  religion  have  Geen 
more  extensively  diffused,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  the  intercourse  between  the 
people  and  the  educated  classes,  the  dis- 
belief must  also  have  found  its  way  at 
last  among  the  people  themselves  ;  more 
especially  since,  as  this  perception  of  the 
nothingness  of  the  popular  religion  spread 
itself  more  widely,  there  would  naturally 
be  many  who  would  not,  with  the  pre- 
caution of  the  men  of  old,  hide  their  new 
illumination  from  the  multitude,  but 
would  think  themselves  bound  to  procure 
for  it  new  adherents,  without  any  regard 
to  the  injury  of  which  they  might  be 
laying  the  foundations,  without  inquiring 
of  themselves,  whether  they  had  any 
thing  to  offer  to  the  people  in  the  room 
of  that  of  which  they  robbed  them,  in  the 
room  of  their  then  source  of  tranquillity 
under  the  storms  of  life,  instead  of  that 
which  taught  them  moderation  under 
affliction  ;  and  lastly,  in  the  place  of  their 
then  counterpoise  against  the  power  of 
wild  desires  and  passions.  Against  men 
of  this  sort  Polybius,  a  century  and  a  half 
before  the  birth  of  Christ,  had  said,  '■'The 
men  of  old  appear  to  me,  not  without 
good  reason,  to  have  introduced  tlie  no- 
lions  of  the  gods,  and  the  representations 
of  the  infernal  regions  among  the  multi- 
tude; our  contemporaries  far  rather  ap- 
pear to  me  to  be  banishing  these  opinions 
without  good  reason,  and  in  a  very  sense- 
less manner."  Whilst  with  the  increase 
of  luxury  a  superficial  education  was 
constantly  extending  itself  among  the 
B 


14 


SCEPTICISM LIFELESS  DEISM. 


Romans,  and  the  old  simplicity  of  man- 
ners was  daily  disappearing,  the  old  citi- 
zen virtues,  the  constitution  and  freedom 
died  away,  a  general  corruption  of  morals, 
and  a  system  of  slavery  was  introduced ; 
and  the  bond  was  also  broken,  by  which 
the  old  state  religion  had  hitherto  main- 
tained its  ground  in  the  lives  of  the  peo- 
ple. Those  philosophical  systems  among 
the  Greeks,  which  thought  lightly  of 
Divine  matters,  or  altogether  denied  all 
objective  truth,  which  left  nothing  to  man 
but  the  pleasures  of  sense,  such  systems, 
for  instance,  as  Epicurism  and  Scepticism, 
would  obtain  the  most  easy  and  the  most 
general  acceptation,  because  they  corres- 
ponded the  most  with  the  prevailing  light- 
minded  sentiments,  which  were  entirely 
limited  to  views  of  the  world,  and  these 
sentiments  again  assisted  to  further  these 
systems.  The  old  religion  could  not 
maintain  its  ground  before  an  inquiring 
intellect,  and  to  the  wit  of  those  who  held 
noticing  sacred,  and  who  were  without 
any  feeling  for  Divine  things,  as,  for  in- 
stance, Lucian,  it  was  an  easy  matter  to 
make  all  religion  a  subject  of  ridicule,  by 
coupling  it  with  the  vapid  and  contra- 
dictory superstitions  of  the  people.  Men 
saw  in  the  religious  systems  of  different 
nations  which  then  came  into  contact 
with  each  other  in  the  enormous  empire  of 
Rome,  nothing  but  utter  contradiction  and 
opposition.  The  philosophical  systems 
also  exhibited  nothing  but  opposition  of 
sentiments,  and  left  those  who  could  see 
in  the  moral  consciousness  no  criterion 
of  truth,  to  doubt  whether  there  was  any 
such  thing  or  not.  In  this  sense,  as  rep- 
resenting the  opinions  of  many  eminent 
and  cultivated  Romans,  with  a  sneer  at 
all  desire  for  truth,  Pilate  made  the  sar- 
castic inquiry,  "  What  is  truth  ?"  Many 
contented  themselves  with  a  shallow 
lifelesss  Deism,  which  usually  takes  its 
rise  where  the  thirst  after  a  living  union 
with  heaven  is  wanting;  a  system  which, 
although  it  denies  not  the  existence  of  a 
God,  yet  drives  it  as  far  into  the  back- 
ground as  possible!  a  listless  God!  who 
suffers  every  thing  to  take  its  own  course, 
so  that  all  belief  in  any  inward  connexion 
between  this  Divinity  and  man  —  any 
communication  of  this  Divinity  to  man, 
would  seem  to  this  system  fancy  and  en- 
thusiasm. The  world  and  human  nature 
remain  at  least  free  from  God.  This  be- 
lief in  God,  if  we  can  call  it  a  belief, 
remains  dead  and  fruitless,  exercising  no 
influence  over  the  life  of  man.  Man  is 
independent,  as  if  he  were  his  own  God ; 


he  created  for  himself  his  own  world, 
without  thinking  further  on  his  God.  if, 
however,  impelled  by  his  moral  feelings, 
the  inward  man  felt  delight  in  God's  law, 
and  endeavoured  to  fulfil  it;  yet  neither 
good  nor  evil  came  before  him  with  rela- 
tion to  God,  except  in  as  far  as  he 
thought,  "  by  doing  good  he  shall  become 
like  God."  '  The  belief  in  God  here  pro- 
duced neither  the  desire  after  that  ideal 
perfection  of  holiness,  the  contemplation 
of  which  shows  at  the  same  time  to  man 
the  corruption  of  his  own  nature,  so 
opposite  to  that  holiness;  nor  that  con- 
sciousness of  guilt,  by  which  man,  con- 
templating the  holiness  of  God  within  him, 
feels  himself  estranged  from  God  :  nor 
does  thil  belief  impart  any  lively  power 
of  sanctification.  Man  is  not  struck  by 
the  inquiry,  "  How  shall  I,  unclean  as  I 
am,  approach  the  Holy  God,  and  stand 
before  him,  when  he  judges  me  according 
to  the  holy  law  which  he  has  himself 
engraven  on  my  conscience  .'  What  shall 
I  do  to  become  free  from  the  guilt  M'hich 
oppresses  me,  and  again  to  attain  to  com- 
munion with  him  ?"  To  make  inquiries 
such  as  these,  this  spirit  of  Deism  consi- 
ders as  fanaticism  and  anthropopathism, 
for  while  it  ridicules  the  vulgar  and  su- 
perstitious representations  of  God's  anger, 
and  the  punishments  of  the  infernal  re- 
gions— forgetting  that  superstitioit,  never- 
theless, supposes  a  real  and  undeniable 
desire  in  human  nature,  which  procures 
for  it  admission,  and  which  it  only  mis- 
understands, as  well  as  a  fundamental  and 
undeniable  truth,  which  it  only  misunder- 
stands and  defaces — forgetting  all  this,  the 
spirit  of  Deism  casts  away  from  it  all 
notions  of  God's  anger,  judgments,  or 
punishments,  as  representations  arising 
only  from  the  limited  nature  of  the  human 
understanding. 

This  was  Lucian's  way  of  thinking. 
And  Justin  Martyr  says  of  the  philo- 
sophers of  his  day  :  "  The  greater  part 
of  them  think  no  more  on  these  ques- 
tions, whether  there  be  one  or  more 
gods ;  whether  there  be  any  Providence 
or  not ;  than  if  this  knowledge  was  of  no 
importance  in  regard  to  our  happiness. 
They  attempt,  far  more,  to  persuade  us 
that  the  Divinity,  although  he  upholds 
the  whole  and  whole  races,  yet  cares  not 
for  you  and  me  and  individual  men.  We 
need  not,  therefore,  pray  to  him  at  all ; 
because  every  thing  revolves  with  un- 
changing   laws  in  one   eternal   circle."* 


Just.  Mar.  Dial,  c  Tryph.  Jud.  p.  213. 


UNBELIEF  CANNOT  ENDURE  LONG. 


More  lively  and  penetrating  spirits,  who 
felt  in  the  world  an  infinite  Spirit,  which 
animated  all  things,  fell  into  an  error  of 
quite  an  opposite  nature  to  this  Deism, 
which  removed  God  too  far  from  the 
world,  namely,  into  a  Pantheism,  which 
confused  God  and  the  world,  which  was 
just  as  little  calculated  to  hestow  tran- 
quillity and  consolation.  The  considera- 
tion of  nature  filled  them  with  the  con- 
ception of  an  infinite  and  Almighty  Spirit, 
not  to  be  judged  of  by  the  limits  of  the 
human  understanding.  But  this  was  not  for 
them  a  strengthening,  an  elevating  and  ani- 
mating feeling ;  but  rather  a  feeling  which 
abased  and  prostrated  them,  because  upon 
it  was  founded  another  feeling,  that  of 
their  own  narrow  nature  and  nothing- 
ness ;  and  there  was  to  them  no  middle 
ground  on  which  these  contemplations 
and  feelings,  so  opposite  to  each  other, 


with  the  limits  of  their  nature.  Man  is 
full  of  wishes  and  desires,  running  into 
infinity,  which  can  never  be  gratified,  and 
his  nature  is  a  lie;  the  greatest  poverty 
united  with  the  greatest  pride.* 

Yet  the  history  of  all  ages  proves  that 
man  cannot  for  any  length  of  time  disown 
the  desire  for  religion  implanted  in  his  na- 
ture. Whenever  man,  entirely  devoted  to 
the  world,  has  for  a  long  time  wholly 
overwhelmed  the  perception  of  the  Divin- 
ity which  exists  in  his  nature,  and  has 
long  entirely  estranged  himself  from  Di- 
vine things,  these  at  last  prevail  over  hu- 
manity with  greater  force.  Man  feels  that 
something  is  wanting  to  his  heart  which 
can  be  replaced  to  him  by  nothing  else, 
he  feels  a  hoUowness  within  him,  which 
can  never  be  satisfied  by  earthly  things, 
and  can  find  satisfaction  and  blessing, 
suited  to  his  condition,  in  the  Divinity 


might  meet  and  amalgamate.  They  be-  alone,  and  an  irresistible  desire  impels 
lieid  only  the  gulf  between  the  finite  and  !  him  to  seek  again  his  lost  connexion  with 
the  infinite,  between  the  mortal  and  the  heaven.  The  times  of  the  dominion  ot 
immortal,  between  the  Almighty  and  the   superstition,  as    history    teaches    us,  are 


poor  weak  being;  and  no  means  to  fill 
up  that  gulf.  They  conceived  God  only 
as  the  infinite  being  elevated  above  frail 
man,  and  not  as  being  connected  with 
him,  attracting  him  to  himself,  and  low- 
ering himself  down  to  him.  It  was  only 
the  greatness,  and  not  the  holiness,  nor 
the  love  of  God,  which  filled  their  souls. 
We  may  consider  Pliny  the  Elder  as  the 
representative  of  these  deep-feeling  and 
inquiring,  but  comfortless  men.  Polythe- 
ism appeared  to  him  only  as  an  invention 
of  human  weakness,  by  which  men,  un- 
able to  embrace  and  hold  fast  the  whole 
idea  of  perfection,  broke  it  up  into  its 
several  parts.  They  formed  for  them- 
selves different  ideal  beings,  as  objects  of 
their  veneration ;  each  one  made  for  him- 
self his  God,  as  he  happened  to  feel  the 
need  of  one.  The  wants  of  weakness,  as 
well  as  fear,  feigned  Gods  ;  what  God  is, 
if  he  be  distinct  from  the  world,  no  human 
understanding  can  know.  But  it  is  a 
foolish  fancy,  proceeding  from  the  help- 
less weakness  of  human  nature,  as  well 


also  always  times  of  earthly  calamity,  for 
the  moral  corruption  which  accompanies 
superstition,  necessarily  also  destroys  all 
the  foundations  of  earthly  prosperity. 
Thus  the  times  in  which  superstition  ex- 
tended itself  among  the  Romans  were 
those  of  the  downfal  of  civil  freedom,  and 
of  public  suffering  under  cruel  despots. 
But,  however,  the  consequences  of  these 
evils  conducted  men  also  to  their  remedy; 
for  by  distress  from  without  man  is 
brought  to  the  consciousness  of  his  own 
weakness,  and  his  dependence  on  a  high- 
er than  earthly  power ;  and  when  he  is 
forsaken  by  human  help,  he  is  compelled 
to  seek  it  here.  Man  becomes  induced  to 
look  upon  his  misfortunes  as  the  punish- 
ments of  a  higher  Being,  and  to  seek  for 
means  by  which  he  may  secure  again  for 
himself  the  favour  of  that  Being.  He 
looks  back  with  anxious  longings  to  the 
time  in  which  his  ancestors  were  so  hap- 
py in  their  old  faith,  and  this  was  the  case 
with  many  then.  They  compared  these 
th  those  when  the  Ro- 


unhappy  times  wi 
as  from  its  pride,  to  suppose  that  such  an  |  man  state  was  in  its  blooni ;  and  they  he- 
infinite    Spirit,  be    it  what   it   mav,  can  '  lieved  they  had   found   the  cause  of  the. 

difference,  inasmuch  as  then  the  gods, 
who  protect  the  Roman  state,  had  been 
honoured  with  piety,  whereas  they  were 
now  neglected.  They  saw  the  conten- 
'tiir feeling  oF  hi7frali'ness  imposes 'no  |  tions  of  philosophical  systems  one  with 
limits  on  the  wishes  of  man.     A  creature  !  another,  which,  while  they  promised  truth, 

full    of  contradictions  !     The   most   un-  ' ~ 

happy  of  all  creatures  !     For  other  crea-  i 
tures   have   no   desires   incommensurate  |  ^ 


trouble  itself  with  the  miserable  affairs  of 
man.  The  vanity  of  man,  and  his  insa- 
tiable longing  after  existence,  have  also 
invented  a  life  after  death.     Thus  even 


Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  lib.  ii.  c.  7 ;  lib.  vii.  Prooem. 


PAUSANIAS  — DIONYSIUS    OF    HALICARNASSWS. 


16 

only  increased  uncertainty  and  doubt; 
and  all  this  led  their  thoughts  back  to  the 
external  authority  of  the  old  religion,  un- 
der which  the  nations  had  been  so  free 
from  doubts,  and  were  so  happy.  Thus 
in  Minucius  Felix,  [p.  42.  Ed.  Ouzel  et 
Meursii,  1672.]  the  heathen  Coecilius, 
after  painting  the  contentions  and  the  un- 
certainties of  the  systems  of  human  phi- 
losophy, and  the  doubts  regarding  Provi- 
dence, which  proceeded  from  a  view  of 
the  misfortunes  of  the  virtuous,  and  of 
the  good  fortune  of  the  vicious,  a  sight 
not  unfrequent  in  the  public  life  of  these 
corrupt  days  of  despotism,  draws  his  con- 
clusion from  it  in  the  following  words.* 
"  How  much  more  reputable  and  better  is 
it,  to  receive  the  doctrines  of  our  ances- 
tors as  guides  to  truth!  to  honour  the  re- 
ligions which  have  descended  to  us !  to 
pray  to  the  gods,  whom  our  ancestors 
taught  their  children  to  fear,  before  they 
knew  right  from  wrong!  And  concern- 
ing the  divinities,  not  to  please  one's  own 
fancies,  but  to  trust  to  our  ancestors,  who 
in  the  childhood  of  humanity  at  the  birth 
of  the  world  were  honoured  by  having  the 
.gods  either  as  their  friends  or  their  kings." 
The  need  of  a  connexion  with  heaven, 
from  which  man  felt  himself  estranged, 
and  dissatisfaction  with  the  cold  and  joy- 
less present,  obtained  a  more  ready  be- 
lief for  the  picture  which  mythology  pre- 
sented, of  a  golden  age,  when  gods  and 
men  lived  together  in  intimate  union  ;  and 
warm  imaginations  looked  back  on  such 
a  state  with  longing  and  desire.  This  be- 
lief and  this  desire,  it  must  be  owned, 
were  founded  on  a  great  truth,  which  man 
could  rightly  apprehend  only  through 
Christianity,  and  this  desire  was  a  kind  of 
intimation  which  pointed  to  Christianity. 
Pausanias,  who  wrote  in  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century,  after  introducing  an 
old  mythological  fable,  says,  (lib.  ii.  ch. 
8.)  "  The  men  of  those  days,  on  account 
of  their  righteousness  and  piety,  were  on 
terms  of  hospitality  with  the  gods,  and 
their  companions  at  the  board,  and  when 
they  acted  uprightly  they  openly  received 
honour  from  the  gods,  just  as  they  were 
also  visited  with  an^er  if  they  committed 
any  iniquity.  And  then  also  they,  who 
are  still  honoured  in  this  manner,  became 
gods  instead  of  men.  Thus  also  we  can 
believe  that  a  Lycaon  was  transformed 
into  a  beast,  and  Niobe,  the  daughter  of 
Tantalus,  into  a  stone.  But  in  my  time, 
when  vice  has  reached  its  loftiest  summit, 


and  has  spread  itself  abroad  over  the 
whole  country,  and  in  all  cities,  no  one 
has  passed  from  man  to  God,  except  only 
in  name,  and  out  of  flattery  to  power," 
(i.  e.  in  the  deification  of  the  emperors) 
"  and  the  anger  of  the  gods  opposes  evil 
more  tardily,  and  is  not  executed  on  men 
till  after  they  have  left  this  world.  But 
much,  which  used  in  former  times  to  take 
place,  and  which  happens  even  now,  those 
persons,  who  have  mixed  falsehood  with 
truth,  have  rendered  incredible  to  the 
multitude."  After  Dionysius  of  Halicar- 
nassus,  who  wrote  only  a  few  years  be- 
fore the  birth  of  Christ,  has  told  the  tale 
of  the  discovery  of  a  Vestal  virgin's  inno- 
cence, who  had  been  falsely  accused,  by 
the  special  interference  of  a  supernatural 
power,  he  adds,  "The  atheistic  philoso- 
phers, if  those  persons  deserve  the  name 
of  philosophers,  who  scoff  at  all  the  ap- 
pearances of  the  gods  which  have  taken 
place  among  the  Greeks  and  the  barba- 
rians, would  deduce  all  these  histories 
from  the  trickery  of  man,  and  turn  them 
into  ridicule,  as  if  none  of  the  gods  ever 
cared  for  any  man;  but  he  who  does  not 
deny  the  gods  a  providential  care  over 
men,  but  believes  that  the  gods  are  benev- 
olent to  the  good,  and  angry  against  evil 
men,  will  not  judge  these  appearances  to 
be  incredible."* 

From  the  nature  of  the  case,  however, 
it  is  clear  that  a  fanatical  zeal,  where  the 
heat  of  passion  concealed  from  man  the 
hollowness  and  falsehood  of  his  faith, 
might  be  created  for  a  religion,  to  which 
man  only  betook  himself  as  a  refuge  in 
his  misery,  and  in  his  dread  of  the  abyss 
of  unbelief;  a  religion  which  no  longer 
served  for  the  development  of  man's  na- 
ture, and  into  which  nevertheless  he  felt 
himself  driven  back  from  the  want  of  any 
other;  and  that  men  must  use  every  kind 
of  power  and  art,  to  uphold  that  which 
was  in  danger  of  falling  from  its  own  in- 
ternal weakness,  and  to  defend  that  which 
was  unable  to  defend  itself  by  its  own 
power.  Fanaticism  was,  therefore,  obliged 
to  avail  itself  of  every  kind  of  power  in 
the  struggle  with  Christianity,  in  order  to 
uphold  heathenism,  which  was  fast  sink- 
ing by  its  own  weakness.  Although  the 
Romans  had  from  the  oldest  times  been 
noted  for  their  repugnance  to  all  foreign 
sorts  of  religious  worship,  yet  this  trait  of 
the  old  Roman  character  had  with  many 
altogether  disappeared.  Because  the  old 
national  temples  of  the  Romans  had  lost 


Comp.  Tac.  Ann.  VI.  22—26. 


Ant.  Rom.  II.  68. 


FANATICISM   AND    SUPERSTITION. 


17 


their  respect,  in  many  dispositions,  man 
was  inclined  to  bring  in  to  their  assistance 
foreign  modes  of  worship.  Those  which 
obtained  the  readiest  admission  were  such 
as  consisted  of  mysterious,  symbolical 
customs,  and  striking,  sounding  forms. 
As  is  always  the  case,  men  looked  for 
some  special  and  higher  power  in  what  is 
dark  and  mysterious. 

The  consideration  of  human  nature  and 
history  shows  us,  that  the  transition  from 
unbelief  to  superstition  is  always  easy. 
Both  these  conditions  of  the  human  heart 
proceed  from  the  self  same  ground,  the 
want  of  that  which  may  be  properly  called 
faith,  the  want  of  a  life  in  God,  of  a  lively 
communion  with  Divine  things  by  means 
of  the  inward  life;  that  is,  by  means  of 
the  feelings.  Man,  whose  inward  feelings 
are  estranged  from  the  Divine  nature,  is 
inclined,  sometimes,  to  deny  the  reality 
of  that  of  which  he  has  nothing  within 
him,  and  foi  the  conception  and  applica- 
tion of  which  to  himself  he  has  no  organ. 
Or  else  the  irresistible  force  of  his  inward 
nature  impels  man  to  recognize  that  high- 
er power  from  which  he  would  fain  free 
himself  entirely,  and  to  seek  that  connex- 
ion with  it  which  he  cannot  but  feel  need- 
ful to  his  comfort ;  but  inasmuch  as  he  is 
without  any  real  inward  sympathy  of  dis- 
position with  the  Divinity,  and  wants  a 
true  sense  of  holiness,  the  Divinity  appears 
to  his  darkened  religious  conscience  only 
under  the  form  of  power  and  arbitrary 
rule.  His  conscience  paints  to  him  this 
power  as  an  angry  and  avenging  power. 
But  as  he  has  no  idea  of  that  which  the 
Divinity  really  is,  he  cannot  duly  under- 
stand this  feeling  of  estrangement  from 
God,  this  consciousness  of  Divine  wrath, 
and  instead  of  seeking  in  moral  things 
the  source  of  this  unquiet  feeling,  which 
leaves  him  no  rest  by  day  or  night,  and 
from  which  there  is  no  escape,  he  fancies 
that  by  this  or  tliat  action,  which  of  itself 
is  perfectly  indifierent,  he  may  have  of- 
fended this  higher  power,  and  he  seeks  by 
outward  observances  again  to  reconcile 
the  offended  power.  Religion  here  be- 
comes the  source  not  of  life,  but  of  death, 
the  source  not  of  consolation  and  blessing, 
but  of  the  most  unspeakable  anxiety, 
which  torments  man  day  and  night,  with 
the  spectres  of  his  own  imagination.  Re- 
ligion here  is  no  source  of  sanctification, 
but  may  unite  in  man's  heart  with  every 
kind  of  untruth,  and  serve  to  promote  it. 
There  is  one  kind  of  superstition  in  which, 
while  man  torments  himself  to  the  utmost, 
he  still  remains  estranged  from  the  true 
3 


nature  of  inward  holiness,  and  while  he 
is  restrained  from  many  good  works  of 
charity  by  his  constant  attendance  on  mis- 
chievous, arbitrary,  and  outward  obser- 
vances, he  is  still  actuated  by  a  horror  of 
any  great  sin, — a  superstition  in  which 
man  avoids  pleasure  so  completely  that 
he  falls  into  the  opposite  extreme;  and 
even  the  most  innocent  enjoyments,  which 
a  childlike  simplicity  would  receive  with 
thankfulness  from  the  hand  of  a  heavenly 
Father,  he  dares  not  indulge  in.  But 
there  is  also  another  kind  of  superstition, 
which  makes  it  easy  for  man,  by  certain 
outward  observances,  to  silence  his  con- 
science under  all  kinds  of  sin,  and  which 
therefore  serves  as  a  welcome  support 
to  sin.  Both  these  forms  of  superstition 
were  in  existence  at  this  time.  The  first 
sort  of  superstition  is  especially  painted 
by  Plutarch,  in  colours  which  can  be 
taken  only  from  the  life,  in  his  excellent 

work,  TTif*  ^(»a-»(J«i/L/,ona?   x«»  ci9foT»)T9^,  OU 

the  contrast  between  superstition  and  un- 
belief. These  sketches  are  taken  from 
his  melancholy  picture,  "  Every  little  evil 
is  increased  to  the  superstitious  man  by 
the  terrifying  spectres  of  his  own  anxiety. 
He  looks  on  himself  as  a  man  hated  by 
the  gods,  one  whom  they  persecute  with 
their  wrath.  But  it  is  even  still  worse 
with  him,  he  dares  not  employ  any  means 
to  avoid  or  remedy  his  calamities,  lest  he 
should  appear  to  be  contending  against 
the  gods.  The  physician,  the  consoling 
friend,  are  sent  away.  /Leave  me,'  says 
the  unhappy  man,  'let  me,  godless  and 
cursed,  and  hated  by  all  the  gods,  let  me 
suffer  my  punishment.'  He  sits  without, 
covered  with  sackcloth  or  with  filthy  rags, 
and  often  rolls  and  wallows  in  the  mire, 
and  remembers  this  or  that  sin" — and  how 
characteristic  are  these  sins !  "  He  has 
eaten  or  drunk  such  and  such  things,*  or 
he  has  gone  such  a  road,  which  it  was  not 
permitted  to  him  to  go  by  the  Divine  au- 
thority. The  festal  days  of  the  gods  fill 
not  the  superstitious  man  with  pleasure, 
but  with  fear  and  horror.  He  gives  the 
lie  to  the  saying  of  Pythagoras,  that  then 
we  are  happiest  when  we  are  going  to  the 
gods,  for  with  the  superstitious  man  this 
is  the  time  of  his  deepest  misery.  Tem- 
ples and  altars  are  a  place  of  refuge  for 
the  persecuted,  but  where  other  men  find 
a  release  from  their  fears,  there  the  super- 
stitious man  fears  and  trembles  the  most. 
In  his  sleep,  as  well  as  in  his  waking 
hours,  the   spectres  of  his  anxiety  still 

*  Compare  Coloss.  ii.  16. 
b2 


18 


STOIC    RESIGNATION. 


haunt  him.  Awake,  he  does  not  use  his 
reason,  and  in  his  sleep  he  finds  no  deli- 
verance from  that  which  disquiets  him; 
his  reason  is  always  dreaming,  and  his 
fears  always  awake.  He  can  never  escape 
from  the  terrific  spectres  that  fright  him." 
Plutarch  throws  the  unbeliever  and  the 
superstitious  man  into  strong  contrast 
when  he  says,  "The  atheist  denies  the 
existence  of  a  God  ;  the  superstitious  man 
would  be  glad  to  believe  in  none,  but  he 
believes  by  compulsion,  because  he  is 
afraid  to  disbelieve ;  in  his  heart  he  is  an 
unbeliever,  but  too  weak  to  believe  that  of 
the  gods,  which  he  would  be  glad  to  do." 
When  he  says  further,  that  superstition 
has  introduced  the  existence  of  unbelief, 
and  serves  as  an  excuse  for  it,  he  advances 
what  is  certainly  true,  and  what  is  confirm- 
ed by  the  contemplation  of  those  times,  as 
we  may  learn  from  the  jesting  of  a  Lucian, 
although  he  does  not  point  out  the  pecu- 
liar and  the  deepest  cause  of  unbelief. 
Still  the  contemplation  of  human  nature 
in  general,  and  of  this  time  in  particular, 
contradicts  another  statement  of  Plutarch, 
— namely,  that  atheism,  on  the  contrary, 
did  not  at  all  serve  the  purposes  of  super- 
stition, and  lead  to  its  introduction,  for 
the  history  of  those  times  exactly  show^ 
us  most  pointedly  how  completely  men 
were  driven,  by  the  irresistible  impulses  of 
their  nature,  to  take  refuge  in  superstition, 
from  a  comfortless  atheism,  under  which 
their  religious  nature  could  not  long  re- 
main in  peace.  Now  as  this  superstition 
had  a  deep-laid  foundation  in  these  irre- 
sistible and  so  long  unsatisfied  wants  of 
human  nature,  in  a  sickness  of  heart 
which  showed  itself  by  many  outward 
appearances,  it  was  therefore  impossible 
that  ridicule  should  cure  the  superstitious 
man, and  the  deeper  the  sickness  lay  within 
Jiim,  the  less  chance  there  was  of  curing 
him  thus.  Or,  even  if  it  were  possible 
to  persuade  the  superstitious  man  of 
the  nothingness  of  some  one  of  the  ob- 
jects of  his  fear,  yet  that  inward  restless- 
ness, whose  cause  was  not  removed, 
would  create  a  multitude  of  other  spec- 
tres, just  as  it  is  useless  to  persuade  a  man 
of  diseased  imagination  of  the  absurdity 
of  some  one  of  his  fancies,  as  long  as  the 
inward  disease  exists,  which  is  sure  to 
fasten  itself,  sometimes  on  one,  sometimes 
on  another,  of  the  outward  objects  pre- 
sented to  it. 

There  were  especially  two  forms  of  an- 
cient philosophy,  wliich  found  a  more 
ready  admittance  than  others  among  those 
of  the  educated  classes,  who  felt  most 


deeply  the  religious  and  moral  wants  of 
man's  nature,  and  which,  connecting 
themselves  in  a  certain  manner  with  the 
popular  religion,  opposed  themselves  to 
infidelity.  The  stoic  philosophy  com- 
mended itself  in  a  corrupted  and  eflfemi- 
nate  age  to  many  noble  and  powerful 
minds,  because  it  raised  them  above  the 
corruption  around  them,  by  an  animated 
zeal  lor  an  ideal  standard  of  morality,  and 
because  in  the  self-sufiiciency  of  the  phi- 
losopher's own  heart  it  taught  him  to  de- 
spise the  baseness  which  surrounded  him. 
This  philosophy  certainly  imparled  to 
many  powerful  spirits  a  higher  moral 
impulse,  which,  however,  was  not  untaint- 
ed by  the  pride  of  self-idolatry,  although, 
as  it  often  happens  that  the  influence  of  a 
philosophic  system  is  modified  by  the  na- 
tural character  of  the  men  who  adopt  it, 
this  pride  might  often  be  softened  in  indi- 
viduals by  their  childlike  and  unassuming 
dispositions,  as  in  the  case  of  Marcus  Au- 
relius.  But  there  were  many  who,  in  the 
idle  contemplation  of  an  ideal  standard  of 
perfection,  overlooked  their  own  baseness, 
and  who  imagined  that  by  an  acquiescence, 
although  it  were  purely  intellectual,  in 
the  excellence  of  that  standard,  they  were 
immediately  raised  above  all  sin,  while 
sin  was  still  reigning  in  their  hearts, — 
men  who,  bearing  in  iheir  mouths  the 
loftiest  professions  of  moral  wisdom,  gave 
themselves  up  in  tlieir  daily  lives  to  every 
kind  of  lust,  qui  Curios  loquuntur  ct  Bac- 
chanalia vivunt !  Stoicism  did  not  teaci) 
a  belief  in  a  God,  who  governs  all  things 
with  a  father's  love,  to  whom  every  indi- 
vidual is  an  object  of  regard,  and  who 
knows  how  to  unite  the  good  of  tiie  whole 
with  the  good  of  the  individual;  but  in  a 
Saturn,  who  devours  his  own  children,  an 
universal  Spirit,  from  which  every  indi- 
vidual existence  originally  proceeded,  and 
into  which  tliey  must  all,  after  a  certain 
period,  resolve  themselves  again.  Every 
thing  is  repeated  after  immutable  laws, 
and  even  moral  evil  is  necessary  to  the 
establislmientof  the  harmony  of  the  whole. 
Ttie  philosopher  looks  calmly  on  the 
game,  and  willingly  ofiers  up  his  indivi- 
dual existence  to  the  requirements  of  the 
great  whole,  to  which  all  individuals  must 
be  subservient  as  its  parts.  The  philoso- 
pher has  the  same  divine  life  as  Jove, 
irom  whom  he  is  sprung.  With  calm  de- 
votion, when  his  appointed  hour  comes, 
he  resigns  it  again  to  its  original  source. 
A  cold  submission,  which  overwhelms  all 
our  natural  feelings,  how  difierent  is  it 
from   the    childlike    resignation    of   the 


INFLUENCE    OP   PLATONISM. 


Christian,  which  leaves  all  the  pure  feel- 
ings of  human  nature  uninjured,  a  resig- 
nation not  to  the  iron  decrees  of  a  neces- 
sity which  commands  annihilation,  but  a 
resignation  founded  on  a  confidence  in 
that  eternal  love,  which  restores  all  which 
is  sacrificed  to  it  in  greater  splendour  and 
beauty.  The  Emi)eror  Marcus  Aurelius 
says,  "  With  deep  reverence  the  philoso- 
pher speaks  thus  to  nature,  which  gives  all 
and  again  reclaims  all.  Give  what  thou 
wilt,  and  take  what  thou  will  I"*  This  is 
not  spoken  with  the  pride  of  one  Avho  de- 
fies nature,  but  only  in  the  spirit  of  one  who 
willingly  obeys  her.  The  words  would 
have  been  words  of  consolation  in  the 
mouth  of  a  childlike  reliance  on  eternal 
love,  which  guides  all  things  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  those  who  confide  in  it;  but 
they  are  dead  and  comfortless  in  the 
mouth  of  stoic  submission  to  a  Deity 
which  devours  all  things,  although  the 
feelings  of  the  man,  who  thus  resigned 
himself  to  the  will  of  an  unknown  God, 
deserve  regard.  But  how  poor,  how  un- 
quickening  to  the  heart  of  a  man  of  feel- 
ing, are  the  grounds  of  consolation  by 
which  he  endeavours  to  reason  himself 
out  of  the  desire  after  an  everlasting  life. 
— "Man  must  consider  two  things;  first, 
that  every  thing  returns  again  and  again 
in  constant  succession,  from  eternity  even 
till  now  ;  and  that  it  matters  not,  whether 
one  sees  the  same  thing  in  one  hundred 
or  in  two  hundred  years,  or  in  an  endless 
infinity  of  time.  Next,  that  he  who  lives 
the  longest  and  he  Avho  dies  the  soonest, 
both  lose  the  same,  for  each  loses  that 
only,  which  he  hath,  the  present  mo- 
ment."! (xi.  14.)  "  Always  think  that  all 
which  happens  or  will  happen,  hath  been 
already. — All  is  only  one  uniform  exhibi- 
tion !"  (x.  27.)  How  miserable  is  tliis 
consideration  of  the  vanity  of  the  constant 
succession  of  earthly  tilings,  without  the 
feeling  that  we  are  destined  to  a  higher 
and  eternal  life !  '-  Every  active  power 
which  ceases  at  some  destined  time,  suf- 
fers no  evil  from  the  fact  of  ceasing;  and 
he,  who  used  this  instrument,  suffers  no 
evil,  because  he  has  ceased.  And  so  also 
the  whole  which  consists  of  the  collec- 
tion of  all  activities,  namely,  life,  when 
it  ceases  at  its  appointed  time,  suflers  no 
evil,  because  it  has  ceased,  and  he  also, 
who  closed   this  chain  at   its  appointed 


*  Monolog.  X.  14. 

t  [See  de  Maistrc.  Soirees  de  St.  Petersburg, 
vol.  i.  p.  294.  Tlie  germ  of  many  of  these  senti- 
ments is  to  be  found  in  Seneca.  Ep. 77.  H.J.  R.] 


19 


time,  incurs  no  blame."  (xii.  23.)  He 
throws  out  the  following  inquiry  in  xii.  5. 
"How  have  the  gods,  who  have  ordained 
every  thing  well  and  witli  love  to  man, 
overlooked  this  one  thing  alone,  that 
many  excellent  men,  who  through  pious 
works  and  sacrifices  have  been  in  confi- 
dential intercourse  with  the  gods,  when 
once  they  have  died,  never  again  have 
come  into  existence,  but  are  altogether 
and  entirely  lost  for  ever  ?"  He  answers 
thus,  "Even  if  this  be  so,  remember  that 
had  necessity  ordained  it  otherwise,  it 
would  have  been  otherwise.  For  if  it 
were  just,  if  it  were  even  possible,  and 
were  it  conformable  to  nature,  nature 
would  have  made  it  thus.  That  it  is  not 
so,  if  it  be  not  so,  must  be  a  proof  that  it 
could  not  have  been  thus  appointed." 
Little,  indeed,  can  cold  reflections,  such 
as  these,  satisfy  a  heart  that  trembles  be- 
fore the  notion  of  annihilation,  and  unsa- 
tisfied with  the  vanity  of  earthly  things,  is 
longing  to  attain  unto  that  ideal  being, 
which  it  has  pictured  to  itself  in  the  in- 
most recesses  of  the  spirit  and  the  affec- 
tions. It  would  only  be  some  peculiar 
natures,  entirely  absorbed  in  reflections, 
and  living  in  the  world  of  their  own 
thoughts,  who  would  thus  limit  and  go- 
vern their  feelings,  their  wants,  and  their 
wishes.  J^aturamfrustra  expdlasfurca. 
The  Platonic  philosophy  was  likely 
to  obtain  a  more  general  influence  than 
the  Stoic  among  dispositions  which  were 
alive  to  religious  wants.  History  has 
often  to  repeat  the  same  statement,  that 
in  times  of  scepticism  and  of  superstition 
this  philosophy  was  efficacious  towards 
exciting  and  animating  more  spiritual 
feelings  of  religion,  and,  in  some  degree, 
assisted  the  preparation  for  the  appear- 
ance of  Christianity.  It  led  man  to  the 
consciousness  of  possessing  a  nature  akin 
to  the  Divinity;  and,  of  a  connexion  with 
a  more  exalted  system,  from  which  all 
that  is  true  and  good  descends  upon  the 
divine  portion  of  man's  nature,  a  system, 
the  revelation  of  which  this  godlike  na- 
ture affords  him  the  organs  to  perceive 
and  to  appropriate  to  himself,  from  which 
the  divine  portion  of  his  inward  nature 
bursts  forth,  for  which  it  must  developc 
itself  independently,  and  into  which  it 
must  again  enter,  freed  from  every  thing 
of  foreign  essence,  as  an  integral  member 
of  that  system.  This  philosophy  did  not, 
as  the  stoic  must  have  done,  if  logically 
pursued,  make  the  divine  nature  in  man 
something  entirely  independent,  an  ema- 
nation from  a  divine  original,  which  as 


20 


Plutarch's  idealism — the  oracles. 


long  as  he  continued  in  his  personality, 
could  exist  independently  for  itself;  it 
did  not  represent  Jupiter  to  the  philoso- 
pher merely  as  the  ideal  of  wisdom  and 
virtue;  but  it  considered  the  divine  part 
of  man's  nature  only  as  an  indication  of 
a  divine  origin,  only  as  a  conceiving  povv- 
er,  which  was  of  no  value  except  when  in 
communion  with  Him  from  whom  alone 
it  can  conceive.  It  considered  man's  per- 
sonality, not  as  a  mere  transitory  vision, 
but  as  destined  for  a  higher  development. 
This  philosophy  considered  the  life  of  the 
individual,  not  a  mere  purposeless  game 
in  the  succession  of  the  world's  events, 
but  it  recognised  in  it  a  stage  of  purifica- 
tion and  preparation  for  a  more  lofty  ex- 
istence. It  required  from  man  no  sup- 
pression of  his  purer  human  feelings;  on 
the  contrary,  it  allowed  him  to  seek  and  to 
exp 

ed  his  attention  to  a  higher  state  of  exist- 
ence, in  which  the  soul,  freed  from  all 
ibreign  adniixlure,  might  arrive  at  the 
clear  contemplation  of  a  truth.  It  did  not 
oppose  the  existing  religions  with  a  bare 
abstract  acknowledgment  of  religion,  but 
it  endeavoured  to  point  out  in  the  whole 
history  of  human  nature,  the  traces  of  a 
communion  between  heaven  and  earth, 
and  of  a  revelation  of  the  divine  nature  to 
man,  under  a  variety  of  different  forms. 
When  scepticism  produced  the  contradic- 
tion of  religions  the  one  to  the  other  as  a 
proof  against  their  truth  ;  on  the  contrary, 
the  Platonic  religion  and  philosophy 
sought  to  point  out  the  fundamental  unity 
which  existed  under  the  multiplicity  of 
forms  in  which  it  was  revealed ;  and  it 
endeavoured,  by  distinguishing  between 
form  and  essence,  between  the  Spiritual 
and  the  Sensual,  between  the  idea  and  the 
symbol  which  represents  it,  to  oppose  un- 
belief and  superstition,  because  it  deduced 
the  causes  of  unbelief  and  superstition 
from  a  confusion  between  tliese  things, 
and  a  neglect  of  these  differences.  This 
method  of  considering  the  matter  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  following  passage  of  Plu- 
tarch, one  of  the  noblest  and  wisest  repre- 
sentatives of  this  system,  and  one  in 
whose  writings  it  was  first  fully  unfolded. 
Pint,  de  Iside  et  Osiride,  c.  67.  "  As  the 
sun,  and  the  moon,  heaven,  earth,  and  the 
sea,  are  common  to  all ;  but  yet  are  dif- 
ferently named  by  different  men,  so  also, 
although  only  one  system  of  nature  exists, 
and  one  Providence  governs,  and  the  pow- 
ers that  serve  this  Providence  are  placed 
over  all  mankind,  yet  by  the  laws  of  dif- 
ferent men,  different  modes  of  worship, 


and  different  names  are  established  for 
them ;  while  some  make  use  of  darker, 
others  of  clearer  consecrated  symbols, 
which  lead  the  contemplation,  not  without 
danger,  to  the  Divinity;  for  some  who 
have  entirely  erred,  fell  into  superstition, 
but  others  who  endeavoured,  as  it  were, 
to  avoid  the  slough  of  superstition,  fell, 
on  the  other  hand,  without  perceiving  it 
as  it  were,  into  the  abyss  of  infidelity." 
The  reverence  towards  a  higher  necessity 
in  the  religious  institutions  of  mankind, 
and  the  recognition  of  an  authority  raised 
above  the  caprice  of  man,  is  beautifully 
expressed  in  these  words  of  the  pious 
Plutarch,  Adv.  Stoic,  c.  31 :  "  Since  Jove 
is  the  beginning,  and  the  centre  of  every 
tiling,  and  all  arose  from  Jove,  so  also 
must  man,  if  any  thing  impure  or  erro- 
neous has  stolen  into  the  notions  he  enter- 


ect  the  satisfaction  of  them.     It  point- I  tains  of  the  gods,   instantly  rectify  and 

purify  them.  But  if  nothing  of  this  kind 
has  happened,  he  must  leave  all  men  to 
that  mode  of  worship,  to  which  their 
laws  and  their  customs  lead  them."  He 
then  quotes  the  beautiful  passage  of  the  An- 
tigone of  Sophocles,  to  prove  that  the  foun- 
dation of  human  religion  is  to  be  referred 
to  the  Divine  impress  on  man's  heart : — 

N  OJUIfAA 

Cu  yjLg  rl  wv  T6  x'l^Boi:,  CKK  dii  TroTi 

1)1  rxuTct  KouJii  olSiv  £|  oTcu  '<petv». — Soph.  Attt. 

Out  of  this  religious  philosophy,  there- 
fore, a  certain  idealism  proceeded,  which, 
connecting  itself  with  the  popular  reli- 
gion, endeavoured  to  establish  and  defend 
it  against  infidelity,  and  spiritualizing  it, 
to  purify  it  from  superstition. 

It  is  in  this  view  that  Plutarch  says,  in 
his  exhortation  to  the  priestess  of  Isis, 
ch.  3.  "  As  the  long  beard  and  the  man- 
tle do  not  make  a  philosopher,  neither 
does  the  linen  garb  and  the  shaven  head 
constitute  a  priest  of  Isis.  But  the  true 
priest  of  Isis  is  he  who,  having  received 
through  the  laws,  the  customs  relative  to 
these  gods,  inquires  into  the  grounds  of 
them,  and  philosophises  on  the  truth  con- 
tained in  them."  When,  for  example, 
superstitious  people  thought  that  the  god 
himself  inhabited  the  priestess  in  the  Del- 
phic Oracle, and  spoke  through  her  moutli, 
so  that  every  thing  literally  came  from 
Phcebus  himself,  and  when,  on  the  con- 
trary, the  infidels  endeavoured  to  turn 
this  representation  into  ridicule,  and  quot- 
ing the  bad  verses  of  the  Pytliian  pro- 
phetess, laughed  at  the  notion  of  their 
coming  from  Apollo,  Plutarch  thus  de- 
livers his  sentiments,  DePythiaeOracul.ch. 


POLYTHEISM   MAKES    WAY    FOR    CHRISTIANITY. 


21 


7 :  "  The  language,  the  expression,  the 
words,  and  the  metre  come  not  from  God, 
but  from  the  woman.  The  god  only  pre- 
sents the  images  to  her  mind,  and  lights  up 
in  her  soul  the  lamp  which  illuminates  the 
future.  The  god  uses  the  soul  as  an  instru- 
ment, and  the  activity  of  the  instrument 
consists  in  its  property  of  representing  as 
purely  as  possible  what  is  communicated 
to  it.  It  is  impossible  that  it  should  ever  be 
repeated  perfectly  pure,  nay,  without  even 
a  large  admixture  of  foreign  matter."  Ch. 
21,  de  Pyth.  Orac. 

Thus  Porphyry  defends  the  use  of  ima- 
ges in  religion,*  "  By  forms  perceptible  to 
the  senses  the  ancients  represented  God  and 
his  powers,  and  they  imaged  the  invisible 
by  the  visible,  for  those  who  had  learnt 
to  read,  in  images  as  in  books,  a  writing 
which  treats  of  God.  We  cannot,  there- 
fore, wonder  if  the  most  ignorant  can  see 
in  statues  nothing  but  wood  and  stone, 
just  as  those  who  are  ignorant  of  the  art 
of  writing  can  see  nothing  but  stone  and 
monuments,  nothing  but  wood  in  tables, 
and  nothing  but  a  scroll  of  papyrus  in 
books."  These  Platonic  religious  phi- 
losophers connected  themselves  with  the 
polytheism  of  the  popular  religion,  but 
they  endeavoured  to  refine  and  spiritualize 
it,  by  constantly  insisting  more  strongly 
on  the  unity  on  which  it  fundamentally 
rests.  There  is,  according  to  them,  one 
source  of  all  existence,  the  abstract  of  all 
perfection,  from  whose  super-abundance 
of  life  all  the  gods  which  are  akin  to  him 
emanated,  and  in  them  the  divinity,  which 
comprehends  all  things  within  itself,  has 
unfolded  itself,  so  that  in  every  one  of 
these  divinities  one  individual  divine  pro- 
perty or  power,  stands  forth  personified. 
In  these  divinities  the  multitude,  who  are 
unable  to  raise  themselves  by  the  force  of 
contemplation,  to  the  one  great  source  of 
all,  pray  to  these  qualities.  Every  thing, 
mediately  or  immediately,  resolves  itself 
finally  into  relation  with  him ;  the  gods 
are  the  mediate  powers  between  the  first 
cause  and  man  distracted  by  multiplicity. 
Only  in  relation  to  these  can  all  worship, 
which  is  testified  by  objects  of  sense,  be 
explained :  that  source  of  all  existence, 
on  the  contrary,  who  is  far  above  all  con- 
nexion with  the  visible  world,  cannot  be 
honoured  by  any  outward  observance  or 
sensible  object;  but  to  him  only  the  phi- 
losopher can  raise  himself,  by  pure  and 
spiritual  contemplation.  Thus  speaks 
Apollonius,  of  Tyana,  in  his  work  on 
Sacrifices  :t  "To  the  first  of  gods,  who  is  | 

•  In  Euseb.  Prap.  Ev.  iii.  7.     f  Ibid.  iv.  13.    i 


ONE,  and  separated  from  all  others,  we 
show  the  most  worthy  honour,  when  we 
sacrifice  nothing  to  him,  when  we  light 
no  altar  to  him,  and  consecrate  nothing 
material  to  him,  for  he  wants  nothing, 
nothing  even  from  beings  superior  to  us, 
and  there  is  no  plant  which  the  earth 
I  produces,  there  is  no  creature  of  the  earth 
or  air,  which  considered  in  reference  to 
him,  hath  not  some  taint  of  impurity  .  .  . 
and  from  the  most  excellent  of  Beings  we 
must  ask  for  good  things  by  the  most  ex- 
cellent of  all  we  have,  that  is,  by  the 
spirit,  which  needs  no  outward  organ." 
This  endeavour  to  refine  and  spiritualise 
the  religion  of  Polytheism,  must  after- 
wards, when  Christianity  extended  itself 
with  great  success,  have  taken  a  polemic 
and  apologetic  direction.  It  was  thus  en- 
deavoured to  prop  up  and  support  the 
rotten  fabric  of  heathenism,  but  this  en- 
deavour, often  too  artificial,  served  only 
to  show  most  easily  how  untenable  that 
religion  was,  which  it  was  at  such  pains 
to  defend,  and  these  philosophical  refiners 
of  religion  themselves  afterwards  gave,  by 
this  means,  to  the  Christians  weapons 
against  the  popular  religion,  which  these 
latter  knew  well  how  to  wield.  Already 
Plutarch  had  made  use  of  the  doctrine  of 
daemones  as  intermediate  beings  between 
gods  and  men,  in  order  to  uphold  the 
loftiness  of  the  gods,  and  yet  to  defend 
the  popular  religion,  while  he  withdrew 
much  which  had  been  by  men  assigned 
to  the  gods,  from  the  race  of  gods,  and 
attributed  it  to  these  intermediate  beings. 
Plut.  de  Defectu  Orac.  c.  13,  et  seq.  Por- 
phyry went  farther,  when  he  considered 
these  daemones  as  impure  beings,  allied  to 
matter,  from  which  these  Platonists  de- 
clared the  origin  of  all  evil.  '^ These 
beings  have  their  delight  in  material  ofler- 
ings,  by  which  their  sensual  appetites 
were  gratified,  they  enticed  men  to  all 
evil  desires,  they  endeavoured,  by  giving 
themselves  out  as  the  gods,  to  seduce 
men  from  their  reverence  towards  the  gods, 
and  to  spread  abroad  unworthy  notions  of 
these  gods,  and  even  of  the  Almighty  God 
himself.  Their  arts  of  deception  have 
found  reception  from  the  earliest  ages. 
Hence  come  the  unworthy  and  unseemly 
stories  of  the  gods,  which  are  propagated 
among  the  multitude  and  supported  even 
by  the  poets  and  philosophers.""*  It  is 
easy  to  see  how   well  such  discussion 


*  Porphyiy  ap.  Euseb.  Prspp.  iv.  21,  22.  [This 
is  the  substance  of  a  considerable  part  of  the  pas- 
sage of  Porphyry  there  found,  but  not  a  translation 
of  any  part  of  it.     H.  J.  R.] 


22 


SUPERSTITION    AND    ENTHUSIASM. 


nies,  and  magic  formulae.  The  latter 
Platonists  themselves  invented  many,  in 
order  to  satisfy  this  desire.  Now,  inas- 
much as  these  Platonists  adhered  to  the 
popular  religion,  and  endeavoured  to  melt 
this  down  with  their  philosophical  ideas, 
they  were  able,  by  an  artful  admixture  of 
truth  and  falsehood,  to  receive  many 
forms  of  superstition  into  their  systems, 
and  to  give  them  a  still  stronger  ground 
of  acceptance  by  means  of  their  method 
of  spiritualizing  them.  The  experience 
of  later  times,  (as,  for  instance,  the  case 
of  the  controversies  about  images  among 
the  schoolmen,)  shows  that  a  superstition 
refined  by  an  idealistic  system  of  this  sort 
is  most  difficult  to  uproot.  Platonism 
awakened  an  indefinite  desire  after  the 
supernatural,  and  after  a  communion  with 
the  invisible  world,  which  it  was  unable 
to  satisfy.  The  less  this  indefinite  desire 
was  understood  by  those  who  felt  it,  the 
more  an  imaginative  power,  unfettered  by 
laws  and  a  speculative  curiosity,  which 
delighted  to  look  into  hidden  things, 
mingled  themselves  with  it,  by  so  much 
the  more  occasion  was  given  for  delusions 
of  every  kind,  and  so  much  the  more 
did  those  who  wished  to  thrust  them- 
selves into  the  invisible  world  by  means 
of  their  own  choosing,  and  avoided  as 
much  as  possible  all  attempts  to  realise 
godliness  in  their  hearts,  give  them- 
selves up  to  most  dangerous  self-deceits 
and  to  deceptions  arising  from  the  influ- 
ence of  others. 

There  were  at  that  time  roving  about 
the  Koman  empire  many  pretenders  to 
supernatural  powers,  for  whom  the  ex- 
istence of  such  a  feeling  and  desire  pro- 
cured acceptance,  men  in  whom,  as  is 
usually  the  case  during  such  a  season  of 
religious  excitement,  a  degree  of  self-de- 
lusion or  enthusiasm  was  mingled  with 
more  or  less  of  intentional  deceit.  Such 
was  that  Alexander  of  Abonoteichos,  in 
Pontus,  whose  life  Lucian  has  written 
after  his  usual  satirical  manner,  a  man 
whose  pretended  enchantments  and  pre- 
dictions found  credit  all  over  the  world, 
from  Pontus  to  Rome,  one  who  was 
honoured  and  consulted  as  a  prophet, 
even  by  men  who  held  the  highest  and 
most  distinguished  ofiices  in  the  Ponian 
state.  Among  the  better  men  of  this  sort 
we  must  class  the  ApoUonius  of  Tyana, 
so  celebrated  in  the  apostolic  age,  who 
was  probably  possessed  of  more  extraor- 
dinary gifts,  and  was  probably  under  the 
the  soul,  which  men  believed  might  be  influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  although 
obtained   by  manifold   outward  ceremo- '  by  spiritual  pride  and  vanity  he  had  at 


Avould  serve  the  purposes  of  the  Christian 
opponents  of  heathenism. 

Thus  these  Platonists,  by  their  sp»iri- 
tualizing  idealism,  and  their  mysticism 
Avhich  excited,  or  pretended  and  feigned 
an  inward  religious  life,  while  they  en- 
listed the  imagination,  a  certain  conveni- 
ent, agreeable,  and  indolent  contemplation, 
and  a  speculation  often  obscure,  into  the 
service  of  the  popular  religion,  endea- 
voured to  restore  that  religion  to  life,  in 
some  degree,  among  the  educated  classes, 
and  excite  some  degree  of  zeal  for  its  ad- 
vancement. But  the  knowledge  of  reli- 
gion, and  a  religious  life  among  the  com- 
mon people,  was  utterly  incapable  of 
being  amended  by  these  refinements  on 
religion.  The  people  still  clung  to  the 
outward  parts  of  their  worship,  they  still 
clung  to  the  old  superstition,  which  the 
})hilosophers  endeavoured  to  advance, 
although  they  refined  and  spiritualized  it, 
and  they  were  totally  unable  to  compre- 
hend any  thing  of  those  spiritualizations, 
and  symbolical  meanings  of  their  religious 
worship.  Nay,  these  Platonists  them- 
selves considered  the  spiritual  knowledge 
of  religion  to  be  attainable  only  by  the 
philosopher,  who  lived  in  contemplation; 
to  it  man  could  only  arrive  by  means  of 
tvio-rriiAVi,  while  the  people  must  content 
themselves  with  the  ^o|«,  in  which  truth 
and  falsehood  ai-e  mingled  together.  It 
was  besides  impossible  to  oppose  super- 
stition eflectually,  by  theoretically  oppos- 
ing to  it  purer  general  principles  of  reli- 
gion. As  its  foundation  lay  in  a  practical 
Avant,  it  could  only  be  opposed  success- 
fuJiy  in  a  practical  manner.  An  unsatis- 
fled  religious  yearning,  the  yearning  after 
a  deliverance  from  that  feeling  of  guilt 
which  was  deeply  implanted  in  the  heart, 
though  it  might  not  have  attained  the 
character  of  a  perfect  conviction  of  sin, 
was  the  source  of  superstition.  This 
longing  must  be  satisfied,  and  the  distract- 
ed heart  eased  of  this  oppressive  burden, 
and  then  superstiiion  would  fall  of  itself, 
together  with  its  cause.  Plutarch  casts 
on  superstition  the  reproach,  that  it  looks 
on  the  gods,  who  are  full  of  fatherly  love, 
only  as  beings  to  be  feared;  but  it  Avas  of 
no  purpose,  to  exhort  men  to  confide  in 
the  kind  and  preserving  deities  (fisot 
aurvi^ti  y.ai  f^tj^ixK)* :)  the  feeling  of  es- 
trangement from  God  in  their  hearts  op- 
posed itself  to  the  reception  of  such  a 
notion  of  the  gods.  Hence  arose  the  at- 
tempts to  find  means  of  purification  for 


WANT  OF  HUMILITY 


least  in  part  destroyed  the  talent  intrusted 
to  him,  instead  of  keeping  it  pure,  and 
increasing  it  by  faithful  and  careful  use. 
But  it  is  difficult  to  judge  of  this  man  ac- 
curately, from  the  exceeding  paucity  of 
autlienlic  accounts.  Those  who,  like 
Piiilostratus,  in  the  tliird  century,  have 
endeavoured  to  represent  him  as  one  of 
the  heroes  of  the  ancient  popular  reli- 
gion, have  injured  him  most  deeply  in 
the  eyes  of  posterity.  He  went  about  to 
stir  up  and  animate  a  spirit  of  religious 
faith,  and  furthered  fanatacism,  while  he 
gave  food  to  that  curiosity  which  inquires 
after  the  tilings  of  the  invisible  world. 
He  spoke  against  superstition,  because  it 
served  to  promote  immorality  when  men 
believed  that  they  could  buy  impunity  for 
crime  by  sacrifices  ;  and  he  declared,  that 
without  a  moral  state  of  the  heart  and 
feelings,  no  sacrifice  could  be  well  plea- 
sing to  the  gods.  He  exclaimed  against 
the  cruel  custom  of  shows  of  gladiators; 
for  when  the  Athenians,  who  were  in  the 
habit  of  exhibiting  these  shows,  invited 
him  to  their  assembly,  he  answered  that 
he  could  not  enter  a  place  stained  with 
so  much  human  blood,  and  that  he  won- 
dered the  goddess  did  not  leave  their 
city.*  Wiien  the  president  of  the  Eleu- 
sinian  mysteries  refused  to  initiate  Apol- 
lonius  of  Tyana,  it  is  difficult  to  deter- 
mine whether  the  Hierophant  was  really 
in  earnest,  and  thought  ApoUonius  an 
enchanter,  who  used  forbidden  arts,  or 
whether  he  was  not  rather  jealous  of  the 
great  influence,  opposed  to  priestcraft, 
which  ApoUonius  exercised  on  the  peo- 
ple, and  to  such  a  degree,  tliat  many  con- 
sidered intercourse  with  him  of  far  more 
consequence  than  initiation  into  the  mys- 
teries. The  concluding  formula  of  all 
the  prayers  of  ApoUonius,  which  he  re- 
commended also  to  others,  who  would 
pray,  although  opposed  to  the  notions  of 

*  Just  like  Demonax,  another  remarkable  man 
of  Athens,  of  the  age  of  the  Antonines,  who,  in- 
stead of  the  mystical  pantheism,  from  which  Apol- 
lonius  of  Tyana  set  out,  opposed  the  superstition 
of  the  people  by  another  more  temperate  one. 
When  the  Athenians  wished  to  exhibit  a  show  of 
gladiators,  he  told  them  they  must  first  pull  down 
the  altar  of  Pity,  of  exjjc,  which  their  city  more 
than  all  other  cities  honoured.  The  answer  to 
the  inquiry,  whether  the  soul  is  immortall  which 
Demonax  gave — "yes!  immortal;  but  like  every 
thing:"  may  be  compared  with  the  declaration  of 
ApoUonius,  that  being  born  and  dying  are  only 
an  illusion,  (Maja)  the  same  substance  sometimes 
withdrawing  itself  into  the  invisible,  and  at  other 
times  clothing  itself  in  gross  earthly  forms.  See 
his  Ep.  58,  a  letter  which  is  most  probably 
genuine. 


23 

those  who  think  the  heart  of  the  suppli- 
cant of  no  consequence  in  prayer,  yet 
shows  wherein  was  his  greatest  deficiency, 
a  deficiency  which  might  well  prove  to 
him  the  source  of  most  of  his  self-delu- 
sions, I  mean  the  prayer :  "  Gire  77ie,  ye 
gods,  that  which  I  deserve'''' — Soirnt  /xoi  ra 
6cl)ii^o/A£>« :  the  direct  contrary  to  the 
prayer,  "  Forgive  us  our  debts  .'" 

A  desire  universally  displayed  itself  for 
a  revelation  from  heaven,  which  might 
ensure  to  the  inquiring  mind  that  tran- 
quillity which  was  neither  to  be  found  in 
the  contending  systems  of  ancient  philo- 
sophy, nor  in  the  antiquated  religions, 
now  called  back  to  the  world  in  an  age 
of  artificial  refinement.  Porphyry,  that 
zealous  defender  of  the  old  religion,  him- 
self alludes  to  this  desire,  so  deeply  felt; 
a  desire  which,  while  he  supports  himself 
on  the  authority  of  the  promises  of  the 
gods,  he  endeavoured  to  satisfy  in  his 
collection  of  old  oracular  responses,  as  the 
groundwork  of  a  system  of  theology. 
On  this  subject  he  says,*  ''The  utility  of 
this  work  those  will  best  be  able  to  esti- 
mate, who,  feeling  an  anxious  desire  after 
the  truth,  have  wished  that  some  open 
vision  of  the  gods  might  be  granted  to 
them,  and  set  them  free  from  their 
doubts." 

The  composer  of  a  sort  of  philoso- 
phico-religious  romance,  called  the  Cle- 
mentine, has  given  us  a  sketch  of  the  life 
of  one  of  this  class  of  men ;  a  man 
thirsting  after  truth,  but  tormented  by 
doubt  from  his  very  childhood,  and  dis- 
quieted by  the  strife  of  contending  opin- 
ions, who  at  last  is  led  to  embrace  Chris- 
tianity in  consequence  of  this  long  unsa- 
tisfied desire  after  truth ;  the  Heavenly 
Father  thus  leading  him  to  a  knowledge 
of  his  Son.  it  is  but  a  picture,  but  it  is  a 
picture  drawn  from  the  life,  which  we 
shall  here  make  use  of  to  characterise 
many  of  the  thinking  spirits  of  this 
period. 

Clement,  a  man  of  a  noble  Roman 
family,  who  lived  about  the  time  of  the 
first  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  gives  the 
following  account  of  himself :  "From  the 
earliest  days  of  my  youth,  doubts,  like 
the  following,  which  have  come  into  my 
mind,  I  know  not  how,  have  constantly 
exercised  my  thoughts.  After  death  shall 
I  exist  no  longer,  and  will  no  one  ever 
remember  me }  does  infinite  time  thus 
drown    all    human    affairs    in   oblivion  I 

*  nsg«  TJic  jx  \ej«iiv  ^iKiTcfixi,  in  Euseb.  Praepar. 


24 


CLEMENT HOW  HE  WAS  BROUGHT  TO  THE  GOSPEL. 


Then  will  it  be  as  if  I  had  never  been 
born  ?  When  was  the  world  created, 
and  what  was  before  the  world  was  ?  If 
it  has  existed  from  eternity,  it  will  last  to 
all  eternity  :  if  it  had  a  beginning,  it  must 
liave  an  end.  And  what  will  again  exist 
after  the  world,  unless  it  be  a  death-like 
stillness  ?  Or,  perhaps,  something  may 
then  exist  which  now  it  is  impossible  to 
conceive.  Whilst  I,  continues  he,  inces- 
santly bore  about  with  me  thoughts  like 
these,  1  know  not  whence,  I  was  con- 
stantly tormented,  so  that  I  grew  pale  and 
wasted  away ;  and  what  was  most  dread- 
ful of  all,  when  I  endeavoured  to  free 
myself  from  this  anxiety  as  being  useless, 
these  sufferings  only  awoke  again  in  my 
heart  with  stronger  violence,  and  inflicted 
on  me  more  severe  vexation.  I  knew  not 
that  in  these  tormenting  thoughts  I  had  a 
good  companion,  who  was  leading  me  to 
eternal  life,  as  I  afterwards  found  by  ex- 
perience, and  1  thank  God,  who  rules  all 
things,  for  this,  because  by  these  thoughts, 
■which  at  first  so  tortured  me,  I  was  obliged 
to  search  into  the  nature  of  things,  and 
thus  to  find  out  the  truth.  And  when 
this  had  taken  place,  I  pitied  as  wretched 
creatures  the  very  men  whom  at  first,  in 
my  ignorance,  I  was  in  danger  of  consi- 
dering happy.  As  I  found  myself  harassed 
by  these  thoughts  from  my  very  child- 
hood, ]  visited  the  schools  of  the  philo- 
sophers, in  order  that  I  might  have  some- 
thing certain  to  repose  upon,  and  I  saw 
there  notliing  but  building  up  and  pulling 
down  of  systems,  strife  and  contradiction ; 
and  sometimes,  for  instance,  the  doctrine 
that  the  soul  is  immortal  gained  the  vic- 
tory; sometinies  the  notion  that  it  is 
mortal :  when  the  first  carried  the  day,  I 
was  glad;  if  the  latter  triumphed,  I  was 
again  cast  down.  Thus  was  I  driven 
backwards  and  forwards  by  different  ar- 
guments, and  I  was  obliged  to  suppose 
that  things  appear  not  as  they  really  are, 
but  as  they  are  represented  from  this  side 
or  from  that.  1  was  hence  seized  with 
greater  dizziness,  and  I  sighed  from  the 
bottom  of  my  heart."  Clement  had  al- 
ready determined,  as  he  could  attain  by 
reason  to  no  sure  and  certain  persuasion, 
to  seek  the  resolution  of  his  doubts  by 
some  other  method,  and  to  journey  into 
Egypt,  the  land  of  mysteries  and  appari- 
tions, and  there  to  search  for  some  magi- 
cian who  could  call  a  spirit  for  him  from 
the  dead.  The  appearance  of  a  ghost 
would  give  him  an  occtdar  proof  of  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  and  then,  once 
firmly  persuaded  by  the  evidence  of  his 


own  eyes  of  this  truth,  no  argument 
should  ever  again  be  able  to  make  him 
waver.  The  representations,  however, 
of  a  philosopher  of  calmer  thoughts  re- 
strained him  from  seeking  the  truth  by 
means  of  these  forbidden  arts,  after  the 
use  of  which  he  would  never  again  ob- 
tain peace  of  conscience,  hi  this  frame 
of  mind,  doubting,  wavering,  inquiring, 
tormented,  and  deeply  agitated,  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel,  supported  by  proofs 
reposing  on  the  operations  of  the  Spirit 
and  on  miracles,  reached  him,  and  his 
case  may  represent  to  us  that  of  many 
others. 

If  then,  after  the  representation  which 
has  been  given  of  the  religious  condition 
of  the  heathen  world  at  this  period,  we 
consider  its  relation  to  Christianity  •,  we 
find  that  on  the  one  hand  Christianity 
was  opposed  by  unbelief,  a  frame  of  mind 
as  devoid  of  all  capacity  for  the  percep- 
tion of  any  thing  Divine,  as  it  was  of  all 
religion;  a  frame  of  mind  which  to  that 
doctrine,  when  it  preached  Divine  truth, 
offered  in  reply  the  inquiry,  "  What  is 
truth  ?" — And  on  the  other  hand,  it  was 
opposed  by  a  kind  of  fanatical  attachment 
to  the  old  popular  religion,  revived  by 
causes  we  have  above  related,  and  by  a 
blind  superstition,  which  those  who  en- 
deavoured to  spiritualize  it,  only  pro- 
moted, a  disposition  of  mind  to  which  the 
worship  of  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth  was 
an  offence.  But  the  restless  religious 
desire  of  many  hearts,  which  sought  for 
rest,  the  thirst  after  some  new  connexion 
with  heaven,  and  after  some  revelation 
from  heaven,  placed  beyond  all  doubt, 
which,  amid  the  strife  of  human  opinions 
might  assure  its  followers  tranquillity  and 
confidence,  were  all  calculated  to  lead 
men's  souls  to  Christianity.  And  yet 
this  indefinite  desire,  often  uncertain  even 
of  what  it  wished  itself,  might  also  deliver 
up  men  to  every  kind  of  delusion ;  and 
spirits,  which  promised  to  impart  the 
powers  of  the  invisible  world,  and  to  ex- 
plain its  mysteries,  and  thereby  flattered 
tJie  natural  inclinations  of  men,  would 
often  be  more  readily  received  than  the 
simple  Gospel  which  opposed  those  in- 
clinations. Only  there  was  in  Christian- 
ity a  power  of  God,  which  put  to  shame 
all  arts  of  delusion,  which  could  make  its 
way,  through  all  the  adverse  powers  of 
delusion,  to  the  human  heart,  and  prove 
itself  to  be  that  which  could  alone  satisfy 
all  its  wants ;  and  which  alone  was  able 
utterly  to  uproot  that  superstition,  which 
no   Platonic   philosophy  could   triumph 


IRREFRAGABLE    GROUNDS    OP    THE  JEWISH    BELIEF. 


over,  because  it  alone  brought  a  radical 
cure  to  the  real  source  of  the  disease. 
But  the  Platonic  philosophy,  inasmuch  as 
it  excited  more  lively  inward  feelings  of 
religion,  and  gave  them  a  more  spiritual 
turn  which  did  not  correspond  with  the 
popular  religion,  was,  in  some  degree,  a 
preparation  for  Christianity;  and  yet,  on 
the  other  hand,  it  might  perhaps  oppose 
the  humble  spirit  of  the  simple  Gospel 
with  its  fantastic  mystico-poetical  religion, 
which  has  its  attractions  for  the  vanity  of 
the  natural  man  that  delights  in  the  Gor- 
geous, for,  althougli  all  that  is  Divine 
bears  the  impress  of  simplicity,  yet  man 
is  least  of  all  inclined  to  inquire  into  what 
is  simple.  This  Platonic  religious  eclec- 
ticism, accustomed  to  melt  down  every 
thing,  even  discordant  elements,  together, 
and  amalgamate  them,  could  not  so  easily 
bring  itself  to  recognize  only  one  thing 
which  was  needful  for  man,  to  give  up 
the  whole  man  to  this  one,  and  to  seek 
every  thing  in  this  one.  With  those,  who 
had  more  than  others,  although  not  ex- 
actly what  human  nature  desires  for  the 
healing  of  its  sickness,  and  the  satisfaction 
of  its  wants,  it  was  a  harder  sacrifice  than 
with  other  men,  to  acknowledge  the  in- 
sufficiency of  that  in  which  their  advan- 
tages lay,  and  to  clothe  themselves  in  that 
humility,  without  which  the  riches  of  the 
Gospel  cannot  be  received  nor  enjoyed. 

If  we  now  pass  over  to  the  religious 
condition  of  the  Jewish  people,  we  shall 
perceive  between  Judaism  and  heathenism 
that  immense  difference,  which  must  exist 
between  a  revelation  of  the  living  God 
and  natural  religion.  Witness  the  pure 
religious  and  moral  spirit  of  Judaism ; 
the  idea  of  one  holy,  almighty,  all-wise, 
merciful,  and  independent  God,  as  Creator 
and  governor  of  the  world,  to  whose  glory 
all  things  must  be  subservient,  and  on 
whom  every  thing  must  depend  ;  and  this 
notion,  not  the  possession  of  a  small 
class  of  initiated  persons,  not  an  esoteric 
doctrine  of  the  priests,  but  the  possession 
of  a  whole  people,  the  centre  of  a  whole 
system  of  popular  religion ;  witness  the 
contrast  between  holiness  and  sin,  which 
was  tiot  to  be  found,  so  clearly  defined, 
in  the  natural  religion  of  the  heathens. 
It  was,  however,  in  the  divine  scheme  of 
education  for  the  human  race,  the  loftiest 
purpose  of  this  religion,  to  awaken  desires 
of  the  heart  and  the  spirit  which  it  could 
not  .satisfy, — the  satisfaction  of  which  it 
could  and  should  only  prepare  and  promise; 
to  call  forth  the  consciousness  of  a  division 
in  the  heart  of  man,  which  it  could  not 
4 


25 


remedy ;  but  still  there  remained  under 
every  change  of  human  civilization,  a  di- 
vine power  in  this  religion,  there  was 
here  an  objective,  authentic  ground  of  be- 
lief, and  not  a  mere  texture  of  varied 
myths  and  stories,  into  which  a  religious 
meaning  must  be  conveyed,  or  from  which 
only  some  dark  glimmering  of  religious 
thought  proceeded.  Hence  this  religion 
was  enabled  to  preserve  its  authority,  in 
general,  unshaken  under  all  the  political 
storms,  which  agitated  the  Jewish  people; 
nay,  in  after  times,  under  all  the  oppres- 
sions of  this  nation,  its  faith  in  the  old 
religion  was  altogether  only  surer  and 
stronger.  But  nevertheless,  even  this  re- 
ligion was  unable  to  escape  the  general 
causes  of  decay,  which  have  in  the  end 
produced  the  downfall  of  all  religious  in- 
stitutions. As  a  peculiar  form  of  religion, 
it  was  unable  to  come  forth  victorious  as 
Christianity  has  often  done  in  similar 
times  of  excitement,  with  a  more  splendid 
display  of  its  excellence,  because,  as  a 
peculiar  form  of  religion,  it  was  only 
given  and  appropriate  to  man,  in  one  defi- 
nite stage  of  development;  and  hence,  if 
it  endured  longer,  it  must  necessarily 
overlast  its  time,  and  become  lifeless  and 
dead.  From  a  struggle  with  those  causes 
of  decay,  no  victorious  result  could  arise 
here,  except  a  revival  in  the  purer  and 
nobler  form  of  Christianity. 

A  penetration  into  the  spirit  of  the 
Jewish  religion  was  not  the  necessary 
consequence  of  a  strict  adherence  to  its 
letter.  The  remembrance  of  God's  won- 
derful dealings  with  these  people,  and 
of  their  theocratic  economy,  so  pregnant 
with  instructive  hints  for  the  development 
of  the  whole  history  of  man,  witii  the 
major  part  of  the  Jews  served  only  as  the 
food  of  a  carnal  pride.  Instead  of  think- 
ing how  they  might  make  themselves 
worthy  of  that  peculiar  guidance  which 
their  forefathers  had  enjoyed,  and  how 
they  might  correspond,  in  heart  and  con- 
duct, to  that  theocratic  economy,  they 
fancied  themselves  the  native  members 
of  this  theocracy,  in  virtue  of  their  cor- 
poral descent  from  the  patriarchs;  and 
in  virtue  of  a  mere  outward  worship  of 
God,  they  considered  themselves  as 
already  citizens  of  the  kingdom  of  hea- 
ven, and  entitled  to  the  enjoyment  of  all 
the  rights  of  such  citizens.  The  idea, 
which  formed  the  centre-point  of  the 
whole  theocratic  economy,  the  idea  of  a 
Messiah,  had  only  been  brouijlit  forward 
with  more  lively  feelings  through  the 
oppressions  and  the  sufferings  of  the  latter 
C 


JUDAS    GALIL/EUS LIFELESS    ORTHODOXY. 


26 

period  of  their  history.  With  the  warmest 
hopes  and  desires,  many  were  awaiting 
the  promised  Deliverer  from  misery,  by 
whom  the  fallen  theocracy  was  again  to 
be  renewed  with  greater  splendour;  but 
then,  the  only  misery  they  felt  was  their 
temporal  misery,  and  not  that  spiritual 
misery,  from  which  the  temporal  had 
proceeded,  and  they  expected  in  their 
Messiah  nothing  but  a  deliverer  from 
their  temporal  calamities.  They  were 
unable  to  comprehend  the  idea  of  the 
Messiah,  and  the  kingdom  which  he  was 
to  found,  in  any  but  a  worldly  point  of 
view.  AVith  heavenly  miraculous  powers, 
he  was  to  serve  for  the  gratification  of 
their  worldly  desires,  to  free  them  from 
the  Roman  yoke,  to  execute  vengeance 
on  their  enemies,  and  to  found  a  king- 
dom of  earthly  splendour,  in  which  they 
were  to  delight  themselves  with  the  en- 
joyment of  all  the  pleasures  which  an 
imagination,  inclined  indeed  to  the  won- 
derful, but  still  looking  only  to  sensual 
things,  could  set  before  their  eyes.  The 
nation  was  destitute  of  guides  and  teachers 
who  could  undeceive  it,  and  really  in- 
struct it  in  the  true  nature  of  their  reli- 
gion, and  of  the  divine  economy.  For 
the  most  part,  their  instructors  were  blind 
leaders  of  the  blind,  who  only  strengthened 
the  people  still  more  in  their  fleshly  and 
perverted  heart,  and  in  the  fancies  to 
which  this  heart  led  them.  Great  harm 
had  particularly  been  wrought  by  a  blind 
fanatical  zealot,  Judas  of  Gamala,  or  the 
Galilean,  who  came  forward  about  the 
year  fourteen  after  the  birth  of  Christ,  on 
occasion  of  the  taxing  of  the  people,  insti- 
tuted by  Augustus  Caesar.  He  urged  the 
people  to  throw  off  die  bondage  of  Rome 
at  once,  and  to  acknowledge  no  sovereign 
but  God  alone !  As  if  a  people,  who  were 
as  far  as  the  Jewish  people  from  tlie  only 
true  n)oral  freedom,  and  governed  by 
wild  passions  and  desires,  could  have 
been  in  a  condition  to  enjoy  even  a  mere 
political  freedom!  As  if  they,  Avhose 
whole  heart  was  estranged  from  God,  and 
given  up  to  so  many  idolatrous  desires, 
could  have  acknowledged  God  as  the 
sovereign  in  reality  and  truth!  This 
flesidy  conception  of  the  idea  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  and  of  the  freedom  and 
the  rights  of  its  citizens — this  mixture  of 
worldly  and  spiritual  things — was,  as  in 
all  other  times,  the  source  of  a  wild  fanati- 
cism among  the  Jews,  which  at  length 
brought  down  upon  Jerusalem  its  tem- 
poral destruction.  They  were,  therefore, 
unable  to  comprehend  what  the  Son  of 


God  said  to  them  of  that  true  freedom, 
which  he  had  come  from  heaven  to  be- 
stow on  man,  sighing  under  the  bondage 
of  sin.  As  they  had  been  unable  to  know 
the  Father  by  their  earddy-mindedness, 
so  they  were  also  unable  to  know  the 
Son.  They  were  also  unable  to  recog- 
nise in  him  the  Messiah,  because  they  did 
not  understand  the  voice  of  the  Father, 
which  spoke  of  him  in  the  wants  and 
desires  of  the  human  heart;  but  they 
would  only  listen  to  the  voice  of  the 
world  and  of  the  flesh,  that  spoke  in 
their  own  hearts ;  and  they  therefore 
chose  to  have  a  Messiah  to  whom  the 
voice  of  their  heart  called  them,  as  men, 
not  taught  by  God,  but  under  the  in- 
fluence of  ungodly  feelings ;  a  Messiah, 
who  would  have  satisfied  their  expecta- 
tions and  wishes,  founded  on  earthly 
considerations.  As  Christ,  whose  warn- 
ing voice  they  would  not  hear,  predicted 
to  them,  to  their  destruction  they  became, 
through  this  fleshly  mind,  a  prey  to  the 
delusive  arts  of  all  false  prophets  who 
chose  to  flatter  this  fleshly  disjiosition  in 
their  idle  promises.  When  the  Temple 
of  Jerusalem  was  already  on  fire,  such  a 
false  prophet  was  able  to  persuade  whole 
hosts  of  the  people,  that  God,  from  out 
of  the  temple,  would  show  them  a  way 
of  salvation  by  some  miracle  ;*  and  be- 
fooled by  him,  thousands  became  the 
victims  of  the  flames  or  of  the  Roman 
sword.  Josephus,  who  was  no  Chris- 
tian, but  who  considered  the  fate  of  his 
people  in  a  more  unprejudiced  manner 
than  others  of  his  nation,  concludes  liis 
narration  of  this  circumstance  with  the 
following  remarkable  reflection: — "The 
unhappy  people  then  allowed  themselves 
to  be  only  deluded  by  deceivers,  who 
dared  to  lie  in  the  name  of  God.  But 
they  paid  no  regard  to  the  clear  miracles 
which  announced  impending  destruction, 
and  believed  them  not,  but  like  men 
utterly  confounded,  and  as  if  tliey  had 
neither  eyes  nor  understanding,  they 
heard  nothing  which  God  himself  pro- 
claimed." 

Among  the  Jewish  theologians  in  Pales- 
tine, we  find  the  three  grand  classes,  which 
usually  form  themselves  during  the  decay 
of  a  religion,  and  oppose  each  other. 
One  class  consists  of  those  who,  confu- 
sing the  inward  and  the  outward  things 
of  religion,  or  rather  forgetting  the  in- 


*  Such  a  sign  from  heaven  as  they  had  often 
required  from  Him,  who  wished  to  show  them  the 
vyay  to  their  true  good. 


PHARISEES. 


ward  in  tlie  outward,  make  a  quantity 
of  Inmian  staiulcs,  engrafted  on  the  ori- 
ginal religion,  the  chief  business  of  reli- 
gion, and  place  its  whole  essence  in  a 
round  of  lifeless  ceremonies,  and  a  dead, 
common-place  ordiodoxy.  Another  class 
is  formed  of  those  who  oppose  this  false 
pretence  to  religion,  and  this  falsification 
of  its  original  excellence;  but,  inasmuch 
as  they  are  destitute  of  a  lively  sense  of 
religion  within,  and  a  hearty  desire  for  it, 
as  well  as  of  a  capacity  for  the  perception 
of  Divine  things,  they  overstep  the  mark 
in  their  opposition,  because  the  true  spi- 
ritual feelings  do  not  accompany  and  di- 
rect with  them  their  critical  judgment, 
and  their  cold  and  negative  disposition, 
while  it  justly  attacks  many  human 
statutes  which  give  themselves  out  as 
Divine  laws,  throws  away  at  the  same 
time,  under  the  title  of  additions,  many 
deep  truths,  which  it  is  luiable,  with  its 
earthly  notions,  to  comprehend.  Lastly, 
come  those  more  quiet,  but  more  warm- 
hearted spirits,  with  whom  the  power  of 
religious  imagination  or  feeling  is  too  pre- 
dominant, who  withdraw  into  themselves 
from  the  strife  of  opinions  among  the 
learned  in  Scripture,  and  seeking  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  meaning  of  the  old 
documents  of  religion  in  their  subjective 
feelings  or  imaginations,  become  mystics 
sometimes  of  a  practical,  sometimes  of  a 
contemplative  character.  These  three 
grand  classes  of  religious  characters, 
which  constantly  return  under  a  change 
of  form,  we  here  recognise  in  the  three 
sects  of  the  Pharisees,  the  Sadducees,  and 
the  Essenes. 

The  Pharisees*  propagated  in  their 
schools,  by  means  of  oral  instruction,  a 
Cabbala,  that  is  to  say,  a  kind  of  polished 
speculative  theology,  composed  of  a  mix- 
ture of  the  Mosaic  religion  with  other 
eastern  religious  elements,  which  they 
fixed  upon  the  original  documents  of  the 
religion,  by  means  of  an  allegorical  spirit 
of  interpretation.  By  means  of  arbitrary 
verbal  criticism,  mystical  meanings,  and 
pretended  traditions  from  their  ancestors. 


•   This  name  is  derived  from  the  verb  f^>•^n, 

either  in  the  sense  of  "  to  interpret"  as  W")'!^ 

the  i^nyiim  T'.u  I'^fjL-M  ««t'  ^.'X""'  which  honour 
the  Pharisees  claimed,  according  to  .loscphus,  or 
in  the  sense  of  "to  separate,"   WV^'Q   (which 

rather  more  nearly  resembles  the  (ircrk  <;><g;!rau-,c,) 
•'  the  man  sepuraled  from  the  profane  multitude, 
(from  the  V"\*<"l"OV»)  ""  *^"*^  who  wished 
to  I'e  revered  as  a  hoher  man." 


they  had  connected  the  ceremonial  law 
of  Moses  with  a  multitude  of  new  out- 
ward precepts,  oil  the  rigid  observance  of 
which  they  often  laid  more  stress  than 
on  the  works  of  righteousness  and  charily. 
They  had  invented  for  themselves  many 
external  offices  of  worship,  which  they 
considered  as  works  of  supererogation,  by 
means  of  which  many  who  fancied,  in  the 
blindness  of  their  hearts,  that  they  had 
from  their  youth  up  fullilled  the  law, 
imagined  tliat  they  could  do  even  more 
than  the  law  required,  and  obtain  for 
themselves  a  higher  degree  of  holiness. 
In  estimating,' however,  the  character  of 
these  Pharisees,  as  well  as  that  of  the 
monks  in  later  times,  we  must  not  put 
them  all  in  one  class,  but  accurately 
separate  the  ditrerent  classes  of  men  from 
one  another.  The  greater  part  of  them 
were,  more  or  less,  hypocrites,  or  mere 
pretenders  to  holiness,  whose  chief  care 
was  about  their  own  reputation  and 
dominion  over  others,  and  who  en- 
deavoured to  gain  respect  in  the  eyes  of 
the  people  by  their  outward  observances, 
while  with  all  this  outward  show  their 
hearts  were  full  of  wicked  desires,  and 
like  to  painted  sepulchres,  and  while  in 
secret  thev  often  delivered  themselves  up 
to  the  gratification  of  their  sinful  passions. 
But  others,  no  doubt,  were  in  earnest  in 
their  endeavours  after  justification  and 
holiness ;  they  observed  conscientiously 
what  their  statutes  prescribed,  and  sought 
to  triumph  over  evil  by  their  ascetic  seve- 
rities. Their  error  only  consisted  in  this, 
that  they  thought  they  could,  by  their 
own  endeavours,  take  by  storm  that 
which  the  grace  of  God  alone  can  bestow 
on  humble  and  on  broken  hearts.  In 
this  struggle  many  of  them  probably  felt 
those  very  experiences  Avhich  St.  Paul, 
once  a  Pharisee  himself,  has  painted  so 
naturally  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  his 
epistle  to  the  Romans. 

The  Sadducees  were,  for  the  most  part, 
rich  people  living  in  great  comfort,  who 
forgot  in  the  enjoyments  of  the  world  the 
higher  desires  of  their  nature  ;  their  hearts 
were  not  softened  by  necessity,  so  often 
the  instructor  of  man,  and  compelled  to 
seek  the  pleasures  of  a  better  world,  but 
they  were  quite  right  in  ojjposing  the 
self-invented  ceremonial  of  the  Pharisees, 
their  troublesome  precepts  and  their  vain 
refinements.  But  while  they  opposed 
these  adidtcrations  of  the  original  Mosaic 
religion,  they  were  alike  unwilling  to  ac- 
knowledge that  historical  development 
which,  under  the  guidance  of  God's  Spirit, 


28 


JOSEPHUS    MORE    WORTHY    OP    CREDIT    THAN    PHILO. 


had  been  bestowed  upon  it;  and  many 
religious  truths,  which  had  first  been  de- 
veloped by  the  prophets,  were  therefore 
denied  by  them.  They  ascribed  Divine 
authority  to  the  Pentateuch  alone,  and 
would  acknowledge  those  religious  truths 
only,  which  a  literal  interpretation  could 
deduce  from  that  volume.  They  there- 
fore denied  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrec- 
tion, and  of  the  destination  of  the  soul  for 
an  eternal  existence.  They  also,  accord- 
ing to  Acts  xxiii.  8,  rejected  a  belief  in 
angels.  We  cannot,  however,  see  how 
they  could  reconcile  this  with  their  be- 
lief in  the  Divine  authority  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, unless,  perhaps,  like  other  Jewish 
sects,  they  considered  the  apparitions  of 
angels  as  mere  impersonal  and  transient 
forms  of  appearance  of  the  Deity.  Al- 
though it  cannot  be  directly  concluded 
from  the  account  of  Josephus,  that  they 
altogether  denied  the  doctrine  of  a  Provi- 
dence, which  extended  to  the  affairs  of 
individuals,  it  is,  however,  clear,  in  con- 
formity to  their  negative  disposition  in  re- 
ligion, that  they  made  God  as  much  as 
possible  an  inactive  spectator  of  the  course 
of  events,  and  supposed  him  to  take  far 
less  interest  in  human  occurences  than 
was  consistent  with  the  spirit  of  the 
theocracy.  They  ascribed  a  pre-eminent 
value  above  every  thing  besides  lo  an  ex- 
ternal morality  in  fulfilment  of  the  law, 
and  hence,  perhaps,  came  their  name.* 
The  less  they  penetrated  below  the  sur 
foce  of  morals,  the  more  they  were  able 
to  ascribe  to  man  a  sufficiency  in  himself, 
and  to  leave  every  thing  to  depend  on  the 
spontaneous  determinations  of  the  human 
will.  The  hard,  cold,  heartless  disposi- 
tion, which  Josephus  attributes  to  the 
Sadducees,  is  also  in  excellent  keeping 
with  this  way  of  thinking.  Although 
Josephus  himself  was  a  Pharisee,  yet  he 
shows  himself,  nevertheless,  always  un- 
prejudiced in  his  judgments  ;  nay,  he  often 
lays  bare  and  naked  the  faults  of  the  Pha- 
risees themselves,  and  tliere  is  accordingly 
no  reason  to  suspect  him  in  tliis  instance 
of  gratifying  his  enmity  at  the  expense  of 
truth. — We  certainly  cannot  from  the  na- 
ture of  the  doctrines  of  the  later  Kara- 
ites, who  were  moderate  enemies  of  the 
traditions  of  the  Pharisees,  draw  any  con- 
clusion as  to  the  nature  of  those  of  the 
Sadducees.  Indeed,  it  is  a  matter  of  en- 
quiry generally,  whether  these  latter  ever 


*  [From   Q'n^,  he  was  just  or  righteous.— 

Others  deduce  it  from  Sadoc,  a  proper  name. — H. 
J.R.] 


were  in  open  connection  with  the  former 
(the  Sadducees,)  although  their  enemies' 
zeal  for  the  discovery  of  heresies  was 
naturally  gratified  in  attaching  this  impu- 
tation upon  them. 

A  company  of  pious  men,  much  expe- 
rienced in  the  trials  of  the  outward  and  of 
the  inward  life,  had  withdrawn  themselves 
out  of  the  strife  of  theological  and  politi- 
cal parties,  at  first  apparently  (according 
to  Pliny  the  elder,)  to  the  western  side  of 
the  Dead  Sea;  where  they  lived  together 
in  intimate  connexion,  partly  in  the  same 
sort  of  society  as  the  monks  of  later  days, 
and  partly  as  mystical  orders  in  all  pe- 
riods have  done. — From  this  society, 
other  smaller  ones  afterwards  proceeded, 
and  spread  themselves  over  all  Palestine. 
They  were  called  Essenes,  {Yaanvot  or 
Eo-(7«to».)  They  employed  themselves  in 
the  arts  of  peace,  agriculture,  pasture, 
handicraft  works,  and  especially  in  the 
art  of  healing,  while  they  took  great  de- 
light in  investigating  the  healing  powers 
of  nature.  It  is  probable,  also,  that  they 
imagined  themselves  under  the  guidance 
of  a  supernatural  illumination  in  their 
search  into  nature,  and  their  use  of  her 
powers.  Their  natural  knowledge,  and 
their  art  of  healing,  appear  also  to  have 
had  a  religious,  theosophic  character,  as 
they  professed  also  to  have  peculiar  pro- 
phetical gifts.  The  Essenes  were,  no 
doubt,  distinguished  from  the  mass  of  or- 
dinary Jews  by  this,  that  they  knew  and 
loved  something  higher  than  the  outward 
ceremonial,  and  a  dead  faith ;  that  they 
did  really  strive  after  holiness  of  heart, 
and  inward  communion  with  God.  Their 
quiet,  pious  habits  also  rendered  them  re- 
markable, and  by  means  of  these  they  re- 
mained quiet  amidst  all  the  political 
changes,  respected  by  all  parties,  even  by 
the  heathens;  and  by  their  laborious 
habits  and  kindness,  their  obedience 
towards  the  higher  powers,  as  ordained 
of  God,  their  fidelity  and  love  of  truth, 
they  were  enabled  to  extend  themselves 
in  all  directions.  In  their  society  every 
yea  and  nay  had  the  force  of  an  oath  ;  for 
every  oath,  said  they,  pre-supposes  a  mu- 
tual distrust,  which  ought  not  be  the  case 
among  a  society  of  honest  men.  Only  in 
one  case  was  an  oath  suffered  amongst 
them,  namely,  as  a  pledge  for  those  who 
after  a  three  years'  noviciate  were  to  be 
received  into  the  number  of  the  initiated. 
According  to  the  portraiture  of  them, 
given  by  Philo  the  Alexandrian,  in  his 
separate  treatise  concerning  the  ''True 
Freedom  of  the  Virtuous,"  we  should  take 


THEOSOPHY    OF   THE    ESSENES. 


29 


the  Essenes  for  men  of  an  entirely  practi- 
cal religious  turn,  far  removed  from  all 
iheosophy  and  all  idle  speculation ;  and 
we  should  ascribe  to  them  an  inward  re- 
ligious habit  of  mind,  free  from  all  mix- 
ture of  superstition  and  reliance  on  out- 
ward things.  But  the  account  of  Philo 
does  not  at  all  accord  with  that  of  Jose- 
phus,  and  the  more  historical  Josephus 
deserves  in  general  more  credit  than 
Philo,  who  was  too  apt  to  indulge  in 
philosophising  and  idealism.  Besides, 
Josephus  had  more  opportunity  of  know- 
ing this  sect  thoroughlj^,  than  Philo;  for 
Philo  lived  in  Egypt,  and  the  Essenes  did 
not  extend  beyond  Palestine. — Josephus 
had  here  passed  the  greater  part  of  his 
life,  and  had  certainly  taken  all  necessary 
pains  to  inform  himself  accurately  of  the 
nature  of  the  different  sects,  among  which 
he  was  determined,  as  a  youth  of  sixteen 
years  of  age,  to  make  choice,  although  he 
can  hardly  have  completely  passed  through 
a  noviciate  in  the  sect  of  the  Essenes,  be- 
cause he  made  the  round  of  all  the  three 
Jewish  sects,  in  a  period  of  from  three  to 
four  years.  Josephus,  also,  shows  him- 
self completely  unprejudiced  in  this  de- 
scription ;  while  Philo,  on  the  contrary, 
wished  to  represent  the  Essenes  to  the 
more  cultivated  Greeks  as  models  of  prac- 
tical wisdom,  and  therefore  he  allowed 
himself  to  represent  much,  not  as  it  really 
was,  but  as  it  suited  his  purpose.  We 
must  conclude  that  the  Essenes  did  also 
busy  themselves  with  theosophy,  and  pre- 
tended to  impart  to  those  of  their  own 
order  disclosures  relating  to  the  superna- 
tural world  of  spirits,  because  those  who 
were  about  to  be  initiated,  were  obliged 
to  swear  that  they  would  never  make 
known  to  any  one  the  names  of  the  angels 
then  to  be  communicated  to  them.  The 
manner  in  which  they  kept  secret  the  an- 
cient books  of  their  sect,  is  also  a  proof 
of  this.  And,  indeed,  Philo  himself  makes 
it  probable,  when  he  says,  that  they  em- 
ployed themselves  with  a  (piXoo-oipia  Sia 
a-vfjuBoXut ,  a  philosophy,  which  was  sup- 
ported by  an  allegorical  interpretation  of 
Scripture ;  for  this  kind  of  allegorizing 
interpretation  was  usually  the  accompani- 
ment of  a  certain  speculative  system.  Ac- 
cording to  Philo  they  rejected  the  sacri- 
fice of  victims,  because  they  considered, 
that  to  consecrate  and  ofier  up  themselves 
wholly  to  God,  was  the  only  true  sacri- 
fice, the  only  sacrifice  worthy  of  God. 
But  according  to  Josephus  they  certainly 
considered  sacrifice  as  something  pecu- 
liarly holy,  but  they  thought  that  from  its 


peculiar  holiness  it  must  have  been  dese- 
crated by  the  profane  Jews  in  the  temple 
of  Jerusalem,  and  that  it  could  be  worthily 
celebrated  only  in  their  holy  communi- 
ty, just  as  mystic  sects  of  this  nature  are 
constantly  accustomed  to  make  the  objec- 
tive acts  of  religion  dependent  on  the  sub- 
jective condition  of  those  who  perform  or 
take  part  in  them.  In  the  troublesome 
and  superstitious  observance  of  the  rest  of 
the  Sabbath,  according  to  the  letter,  and 
not  according  to  the  spirit,  they  went  even 
farther  than  the  other  Jews,  only  with 
this  diflerence,  that  they  were  in  good 
earnest  in  the  matter,  while  the  Pharisees 
by  their  casuistry  relaxed  their  rules,  or 
drew  them  tighter,  just  as  it  suited  their 
purpose.  The  Essenes  not  only  strenu- 
ously abhorred,  like  the  other  Jews,  con- 
tact with  the  uncircumcised,  but,  having 
divided  themselves  into  four  classes,  the 
Essenes  of  a  higher  grade  were  averse 
from  contact  with  those  of  a  lower,  as  if 
they  were  rendered  unclean  by  it,  and 
when  any  thing  of  this  kind  did  happen, 
they  purified  themselves  after  it.  Like 
many  other  Jews,  they  attributed  great 
value,  in  general,  to  lustration  by  bathing 
in  cold  water.  To  their  ascetic  notions 
the  constant  and  healthy  practice  in  the 
East  of  anointing  with  oil  seemed  unholy, 
and  if  it  befel  any  one  of  them,  he  was 
obliged  to  purify  himself.  It  was  also  a 
great  abomination  to  them,  to  eat  any 
food  except  such  as  had  been  prepared  by 
persons  of  their  own  sect.  They  would 
die  rather  than  eat  of  any  other.  This  is 
a  suflicient  proof  that  although  the  Essenes 
might  possess  a  certain  iijward  religious 
life,  and  a  certain  practical  piety,  yet  that 
these  qualities  with  them,  as  well  as  with 
many  other  mystical  sects  (as,  for  exam- 
ple, those  of  the  middle  ages)  were  con- 
nected with  a  theosophy,  which  desired 
to  know  things  hidden  from  human 
reason,  (If^/Sariusur  etq  «  rtj  fxr)  lu^ccxi*,) 
and  therefore  lost  itself  in  idle  imagina- 
tions and  dreams,  and  were  also  mixed 
up  with  an  outward  asceticism,  a  proud 
spirit  of  separation  from  the  rest  of  man- 
kind, and  superstitious  observances  and 
demeanours  totally  at  variance  with  the 
true  spirit  of  inward  religion. 

The  religious  and  theological  character 
of  the  Jews  who  dwelt  at  Alexandria,  that 
remarkable  intermediate  spot  between  the 
eastern  and  the  western  world,  was  of  an 
entirely  peculiar  cast.  By  means  of  con- 
stant intercourse  with  educated  Hellenists 
in  one  of  tlie  most  flourishing  seats  o( 
Hellenistic  literature  and  civilization,  they 
c2 


PHILO'S    VIEW   OP   THE   DESTINY   OF   HIS    PEOPLE. 


30 


most  have  gradually  lost  their  usual  ab- 
horrence of  foreign  customs.  By  their 
sojourn  among  the  Greeks  for  centuries, 
separated  from  their  original  country,  they 
gradually  assumed  the  Greek  language, 
and  much  of  Greek  manners ;  they  be- 
came more  and  more  estranged  from  the 
language  and  the  habits  of  their  own  na- 
tion, and  many  of  them  were  strongly  at- 
tracted by  the  charms  of  Greek  literature, 
and  especially  of  Greek  philosophy.* 

Under  these  circumstances  two  cases 
might  occur.  One  would  be  the  case  of 
those,  who  became  so  thoroughly  imbued 
with  the  spirit  of  this  foreign  culture,  and 
Hellenized  to  such  an  extent,  that  they 
lost  even  that  reverence  for  the  ancient 
holy  institutions  of  their  people,  so  deeply 
implanted  in  the  heart  of  a  Jew.  A  few 
general  superficial  ideas,  skimmed  from 
Grecian  philosophy,  and  a  certain  moral 
cultivation, became  to  these  men  their  high- 
est law,  and  after  this  miserable  and  false 
illumination,  they  dared  to  condemn  and 
to  ridicule  the  holy  history  and  documents 
of  their  people,  which  they  could  not  un- 
derstand, because  they  were  deficient  in 
the  deep  religious  feeling  and  the  know- 
ledge requisite  for  that  purpose.  We  find 
in  Philo  traces  of  this  kind  of  the  Jewish 
scofTer  in  places  where  we  can  hardly 
imagine  he  is  glancing  at  the  heathen.  As 
when  he  opposes  Moses,  who  remained 
always  true  to  his  people  in  the  seductions 
of  the  Egyptian  court,  to  these  renegades : 
"Who  transgress  the  law,  in  which  they 
have  been  born  and  educated,  who  des- 
troy the  customs  of  their  country,  to 
which  no  blame  can  be  attached,  and  in 
their  prejudice  for  that  which  is  new,  lose 
all  remembrance  of  that  which  is  old."! 
In  another  placej  he  thus  expresses  him- 
self against  such  people;  "Who  are  dis- 
inclined to  the  religious  system  of  their 
country;  who  always  look  on  the  laws 
of  their  religion  to  blame  and  accuse  them, 
and  use  these  and  similar||  narrations  pro- 
fligately, as  a  support  to  their  Atheism 
(aOeoTij;,)  and  say,  '  Do  you  really  think 
higldy  of  your  laws,  and  imagine  that 
they  contain  the  rules  of  truth  i*     Behold  ! 


what  you  call  your  holy  Scriptures,  do 
they  not  contain  myths  and  fables  which 
you  yourselves  laugh  at  w'hen  you  hear 
them  from  others  ?'  "* 

Nevertheless,  the  faith  in  the  Divine 
origin,  and  the  holiness  of  their  religion, 
had  taken  too  deep  hold  on  the  hearts  of 
most  Jews ;  the  seed  of  religion,  which 
had  been  sown  in  their  earliest  childhood, 
and  had  spread  over  all  their  life,  had 
made  too  deep  impression  on  their  hearts, 
to  allow  of  its  being  thus  dissipated  and 
destroyed.  Although  they  were  attracted 
by  the  Greek  philosophy,  and  especially 
by  that  which  had  chiefly  prevailed  at 
Alexandria  in  later  times,  and  which  by 
its  nature  would  give  the  best  opportunity 
for  a  religious  spirit  to  connect  itself  with, 
namely,  the  Platonic,  yet  still  they  were 
far  from  consciously  and  intentionally 
sacrificing  their  religion  and  their  holy 
writings  to  the  authority  of  a  human  phi- 
losophy. They  had  far  rather  learnt,  by 
comparing  the  religious  knowledge  of 
their  people  with  that  of  the  Egyptians 
and  the  Greeks,  day  by  day  to  estimate 
better  the  distinguished  character  of  their 
old  religion,  and  to  see  more  clearly  the 
Divine  providence  which  guided  their  pe- 
culiar history,  and  the  influence  which 
these  were  destined  to  bear  on  the  whole 
human  race.  Philo,  whom  we  may  name 
the  representative  of  these  Alexandrians, 
speaks  thus:"]" — ''That,  which  the  most 
genuine  philosophy  alone  is  able  to  im- 
part to  its  scholars,  the  knowledge  of  the 
Most  High,  is  communicated  by  our  laws 
and  our  customs  to  the  whole  Jewish 
people."  He  declares  it  to  be  the  destiny 
of  the  Jews,  inasmuch  as  they  alone  were 
consecrated  as  a  whole  people,  to  the 
worship  of  the  One  true  God,  and  M'ere 
to  spread  this  to  the  whole  human  race, 
that  they  were  to  be  priests  and  prophets 
for  all  mankind.J  Philo  was  well  aware 
that  it  is  the  characteristic  of  the  Divine 
revelation,  to  let  the  light  of  truth  gene- 


*  [A  very  elaborate  work  on  the  Alexandrian 
Jews  has  a[)pi'arc(l  since  the  publication  of  this 
History.  It  is  entitled,  Geschiihtliche  Uarstclluiig 
(ler  Judisch-Alexandrinischen  Religions-Pliiloso- 
phio:  vertksst  von  A.  F.  Dtihiie,  P.  D.  &c  Hallo, 
1834.  2  vol.  8vo.— H.  .1.  K.] 

-j-  De  Vila  Mosis,  i.  (i07. 

\  De  confus.  ling.  320. 

II  He  is  s])eak.iiii^  iierc  of  the  confusion  of 
tongues  at  the  tower  of  Babel, 


*  Also,  in  the  passage  de  Nom.  Mutat.  p.  1053, 
where  Philo  introduces  the  sarcasms  of  an  .  6s:f,  or 
uo-«/3«c,  the  bitterness  with  which  he  speaks,  may 
well  lead  us  to  conclude  that  this  scofler  was  an 
unbelieving  Jew  In  an  heathen  this  jesting  could 
not  have  appeared  so  striking  to  him.  He  looks 
ujion  it  as  a  ])unishment  of  the  profligate  opinions 
of  tills  man,  that  he  soon  after  hanged  himself,  j/  « 
^i«gcc  Kuj  (fu^xxSagTcc  jui^Ji  x/flagoi  b'tv-iTH)  TtxajTinrn. 
I3y  means  of  his  allegorical  explanations  Philo 
wished  to  remove  what  had  given  rise  to  the  ridi- 
cule of  this  man,  in  order  that  others  might  not  fall 
into  a  similar  snare  and  punishment. 

t  Do  Caritate,  699. 

i  De  Abrah.  364;  De  vita  Mosis,  i.  625. 


THE    ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL    AND    THE    SCRIPTURE. 


31 


rally  shine  before  all  men,  and  not  to  keep  I  their  own  religion.  But  as  it  is  univer- 
it  purposely  hidden.  The  more  easily  sally  so  difficult  for  men  to  keep  exactly 
the  people  of  Alexandria  might  be  se-  the  right  path  between  the  two  opposite 
duced  into  joining  in  the  traftic  in  secret  I  faults  of  an  abrupt  and  narrow-minded 
things,  attendant  on  the  mysteries,  the  j  rejection  of  every  strange  impression,  and 
more  remarkable,  therefore,  and  pleasing  1  a  too  great  facility  in  accepting  them, 
is  an  expression  in  an  Alexandrian,  which  I  these  men,  while  they  wislied  to  prove 
shows,  that  he  recognised  the  character  j  the  excellence  of  their  religion  to  Greeks 


of  simplicity  and  publicity  in  Judaism, 
and  opposed  it  to  the  hatred  of  tlie  light, 
incident  to  the  mysteries.*     ""All  myste- 


of  education,  and  especially  of  a  philoso- 
phical education,  on  their  own  ground, 
might  also  easily  have  been  led  to  intro- 


rics,  all  such  pomp  and  such  tricks  Moses  j  duce  into  tlieir  Old  Holy  Scriptures  some 


removed  far  from  the  sacced  lawgiving, 
because  he  did  not  desire  that  those  who 
were  educated  in  such  a  religion,  suffer- 
ing themselves  to  be  blinded  by  myste- 
rious matters,  should  neglect  the  truth, 
nor  follow  what  belongs  to  the  night  and 


notions  foreign  to  them,  and  to  forget  the 
peculiar,  practical  spirit  of  those  writings, 
which  diller  so  decidedly  from  all  other 
religious  and  philosophical  dispensations. 
This,  at  least,  happened ;  they  wished  to 
prove    to    the   Greeks,    that    their   Holy 


darkness,  neglecting  that  which  is  worthy  j  Scriptures  harmonized  with  the  spirit  of 
of  the  light  and  of  the  day.  None  also  the  Platonic  philosophy,  by  which  they 
of  those  who  know  Moses,  and  reckon  |  themselves  were  governed,  and  that  they 
themselves  among  his  disciples,  allow  j  were  the  richest  source  of  all  philoso- 
themselves  to  be  initiated  into  such  I  phical  notions.  They  were,  therefore, 
mysteries  nor  initiate  others ;  for  either  I  obliged,  although  it  was  decidedly  not 
to  learn  or  to  teach  these  mysteries,  is  no  |  their  intention,  to  do  violence  to  the 
slight  crime  ;|  for  ye  initiated!  wherefore,  i  Scriptures,  in  order  to  be  able  to  find  in 
if  these  are  honourable  or  useful  things,  1  them     something    which     was     entirely 


do  ye  shut  yourselves  up  in  deep  dark- 
ness, and  do  service  to  three  or  four  only, 
when  you  might  benefit  all  mankind,  if 
you  would  communicate  in  the  market- 
places what  might  be  of  use  to  all,  in  or- 
der that  all  might  be  able  to  take  a  part  in 
a  better  and  a  happier  life  r" 

In  order  properly  to  judge  of  these 
Alexandrians,  we  must  pay  due  regard  to 
their  relation  to  the  various  parties,  with 
which  ihey  had  to  contend.  On  the  one 
hand,  they  must  defend  their  religion  and 
its  documents,  which  they  constantly  re- 
garded with  reverence,  against  Jewish 
and  heathen  scoffers.  This  apologetic 
strife  might  induce  them  to  penetrate 
more  deeply  into  the  essence  of  their 
religion,  and  the  spirit  of  their  Old  Scrip- 
tures, while  they  endeavoured  to  oppose 
the  prejudices  of  the  heathen  against 
them.  Hence  they  might  become  more 
free  in  their  own  mode  of  thinking  and 
their  own  notions,  from  this  very  circum- 
stance, that  tliey  were  obliged  to  take  up 
a  strange  position,  and  from  that  position 
endeavour  to  contemplate   the  ideas   of 


•   De  victimas  OfTeront.  p.  56. 

■f-  This  emphatic  warning  appears  to  indicate 
that  already  many  of  the  Jews  might  have  allowed 
themselves  to  be  seduced  by  the  pomp  of  the  mys- 
teries. [There  is  an  able  chapter  on  the  mysticism 
of  the  Alexandrian  school  in  Hcinroth's  work  on 
Mysticism.— H.  J.  R.] 


foreign  to  their  nature.  This  would  soon 
conduct  them  to  a  false  Hermeneutic. 
And  they  became  still  more  enamoured 
of  the  character  of  this  false  Hermeneutic, 
while  they  were  opposing  anotlier  and  a 
contrary  false  tendency  of  the  theological 
and  religious  mind  among  their  country- 
men, which  certainly  contributed  much 
to  render  the  Jewish  religion  contemptible 
in  the  eyes  of  the  heathen.  There  were 
men  who  fancied  that  they  were  to  under- 
stand, in  a  gross  and  sensual  acceptation, 
the  things  of  the  Spirit,  which  are  re- 
vealed under  the  covering  of  human  lan- 
guage, and  hence  degraded  the  spiritual 
into  the  sensual;  they  lost  themselves  in 
petty  refinements  about  the  letter  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  which  they  might  have 
avoided,  could  they  have  perceived  the 
spirit  in  the  letter;  and  while  they  did 
not  distinguish  the  anthropopalhical 
images,  in  which  Divine  things  were 
brought  down  to  man's  understanding  in 
the  childhood  of  human  nature,  (and,  to 
say  the  truth,  in  regard  to  the  Divine 
nature,  we  always  remain,  in  this  life,  as 
children,  we  can  only  conceive,  think, 
and  speak  as  children,)  from  the  ideas 
which  are  enveloped  in  these  images, 
they  fell  into  many  misconceptions  of 
God,  and  of  that  which  belongs  to  God, 
which  were  some  of  them  injurious  in  a 
)  practical  point  of  view.     These  are  those 


32 


DISPOSITION  REQUIRED  BY  THE  SCRIPTURE. 


zealots,  "so*  conceited  at  their  own 
hair-splitting  in  the  literal  interpretation 
of  Scripture,"  whose  sensual  anthropo- 
pathical  representation  of  God  and  Divine 
things,  Philof  so  often  combats.  Op- 
posing this  sense-bound,  literal  mode  of 
interpretation,  the  Alexandrians  declared 
it  the  loftiest  problem  of  interpretation,  in 
the  letter  to  recognise  the  hidden  spirit, 
and  to  free  it  from  this  covering.  In 
order,  however,  said  they,  to  be  able  to 
perceive  this  spirit,  we  need  a  spiritual, 
religious  habit  of  mind,  capable  of  under- 
standing il,  and  akin  to  the  Divine  nature]]; 
and  the  errors  of  those  sensuous  interpre- 
ters of  the  Bible  came  from  this  very 
cause,  that  they  are  without  this  habit  of 
mind,  and  are  so  utterly  enthralled  by 
what  is  sensuous.  It  was  certainly  judi- 
cious to  call  the  attention  of  those  sen- 
suous-minded men,  in  the  first  instance, 
to  that  which,  within  their  own  hearts, 
opposed  a  right  understanding  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures — for  they  might  be  im- 
pelled by  this  means  to  turn  themselves 
to  the  Spirit,  "which  maketh  free," 
which  alone  was  able  to  free  their  minds 
from  this  veil.  Philo  was  also  well 
aware,  that  without  being  enlightened 
from  a  higher  source,  man  can  never 
arrive  at  understanding  that  which  is 
Divine.  He  was  far  from  the  imagination, 
that  man  could,  by  the  employment  of 
his  own  powers,  purify  that  part  of  his 
nature  which  is  akin  to  the  Divine,  and 
by  that  means  alone,  acquire  for  himself 
a  knowledge  of  Divine  things.  "  Every 
movement  of  the  spirit,  (tending  towards 
God,")  says  he,  (de  Migrat.  Abraham  414,) 
"  without  divine  grace,  (aest;  fisia?  iiri(p^o- 
erv>ri<;,)  is  pernicious,  and  it  is  better  to  re- 
main here  below,  and  wander  about  amidst 
mortal  life,  like  the  rest  of  the  human 
race,  than  wishing  to  raise  ourselves  up 
to  heaven,  to  fall  by  pride."  [p.  283,  Ed. 
Turneb.]  Justly,  indeed,  does  Philo  re- 
mark, that  as  man  consists  of  spirit  and 
of  sense,  in  regard  to  both  of  these,  that 
there  are  two  kinds  of  that  conceit  which 
thinks    it  can   dispense  with    God — the 


Of  T«C    pHTWC  !r§-<^//«.T8WC    trcpKTTM  htM)  T*C  C?^Wf 

iciiirrr-j.KOTi:.     Dc  Somniis,  580. 

f  See  for  instance,  de  Plantat.  Noe,  219,  where, 
in  spcakinc;  of  the  representations  such  people 
fonn  to  tlicmselvcs  from  their  sensual  mode  of  in- 
terpretin.t?  Scripture,  he  says,  t^v  uvSga-ri^cg^jv  st/ 

Ti    KU    i.vBgUsr'j'Txfji;  TO  stfT/SV    iW^.-yOtTOIt  W  tlKTi^UHC 
KU    OcrlCTilTOi    K'^MfiTll    fXTyJMHV    L^nm  inBlTjUOTXTlt 

ovru.  fC^ufxitri. 

■^  By  means  of  the  vot^oi:  mtufxtTUiov  in  us,  we 
can  understand  the  vwrcv,  Biav,  which  is  enveloped 
in  the  a.irBmiH,  a-u^nuus   of  the  Holy  Scri^jturc. 


idolatry  of  sensuality,  and  the  idolatry  of 
reason  that  is  left  to  itself,  and  gives 
itself  out  as  self-sufficing.*  "  Never  must 
we  believe,"  says  he,  (de  Somniis,  1111,) 
"  that  man  himself  is  in  a  condition  to 
purify  his  life,  which  is  full  of  stains, 
without  God's  grace."  But,  although  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  Philo  points  to 
God  as  the  source  of  enlightenment  and 
sanctification,  yet  it  is  also  certain  that  he 
directs  our  attention  more  to  the  necessity 
of  an  illumination  of  the  reason,  than  to 
that  of  a  complete  practical  change  in  the 
heart;  that  he  did  not  speak  enough  of 
the  nature  of  this  practical  change,  and 
did  not  enough  show  that  all  illumination 
in  Divine  matters  can  and  must  proceed 
only  from  practical  grounds ;  and  tliis 
deficiency  is  in  exact  harmony  with  that 
exclusively  prevalent  contemplative  spirit 
of  his  in  religion,  of  which  we  shall 
shortly  have  occasion  to  speak. 

Without  that  inward  sense,  indeed,  en- 
lightened through  the  Spirit  of  God,  that 
Avjiich  is  Divine  in  the  holy  Scripture 
cannot  be  comprehended;  but  the  en- 
lightening by  the  Spirit  of  God  by  no 
means  excludes  the  use  of  those  natural 
and  human  means,  which  are  requisite  to 
the  understanding  of  any  writings  what- 
ever, nor  does  it  make  them  at  all  super- 
fluous; but,  on  the  contrary,  it  rather  sets 
them  forth  as  necessary  conditions,  be- 
cause the  mind,  enlightened  by  God's 
Spirit,  can  then  first  rightly  quicken  and 
conduct  the  use  of  these  human  means. 
But  to  that  carnal  pride,  which,  with  an 
unenlightened  mind,  would  think  to  have 
eternal  life  in  the  bare  letter  of  Scripture, 
there  was  opposed  another  kind  of  pride, 
which  made  little  enough  of  the  letter, 
and  which,  by  means  of  immediate  illu- 
minations, expected  to  be  able  universally 
to  understand  the  spirit  of  Scripture  with- 
out the  use  of  natural  and  human  means. 
This  sort  of  pride,  despising  most  haughti- 
ly the  assistance  and  the  rules  of  logical 
and  grammatical  interpretation,  was  ne- 
cessarily the  source  of  much  self-deceit, 
and  must  have  punished  itself  by  itself. 
Where,  through  simple  remarks  on  the 
logical  connection  of  the  context,  and 
through  observance  of  the  Hebrew-Greek 
idiom,  many  difficulties  in  the  translation 
current  at  Alexandria,  in  which  Philo  read 
the  Old  Testament,  might  have  been  very 
easily  removed,  Philo  overlooked  the 
simplest  ways,  and  sought  deep  mysteries 


*  CI  T8  TUI  VOV    BlUffUTd,!  KXt    TftlV     oLKTfjuO-iiey,  0«    //8V 

ejtuviv,  ci  it  ToujTitv  6e3»-A.aoTM/cr«.   De  Victim.  Ofler 
ib.  858. 


NEEDLESS  DREAD  OP  ANTHROPOPATHISM. 


in  places  where  there  was  not  the  slight- 
est trace  of  them.*  And,  therefore,  as 
these  Alexandrians  did  not  show  proper 
regard  to  the  letter  of  the  Scripture,  as 
they  had  no  perception  of  the  just  rela- 
tion of  the  spirit  to  the  letter,  tliey  were 
on  that  account  more  likely  to  run  the  risk, 
instead  of  deducing  the  spirit  of  Scripture 
from  itself,  of  introducing  into  it  a  spirit 
foreign  to  its  nature,  but  one  by  wliich 
tlicy  were  captivated,  in  consequence  of 
their  peculiar  philosophical  habits  of 
mind.  Instead  of  constantly  keeping  close 
to  the  practical  aim  of  the  theocratic  plan ; 
instead  of  forming  men  to  a  God-devoted 
life,  of  representing  to  them  God  as  Crea- 
tor, Governor,  and  Law-giver;  and  instead 
of  referring  every  thing  in  Scripture  to 
this,  the  highest  aim  of  ihe  Divine  reve- 
lations, they  attributed  to  them,  as  their 
highest  purpose,  one  foreign  to  their  na- 
ture, and  borrowed  from  the  Platonic  plii- 
losophical  religion :  namely,  to  impart 
general  speculative  ideas  (t<x  vorira.)  to 
those  who  were  capable  of  receiving  them. 
They  formed  for  themselves,  in  conse- 
quence, an  idealism  in  Judaism,  similar  to 
that  of  the  new  Platonic  school  of  reli- 
gious philosophers  in  heathenism,  except 
that  they  thoroughly  recognised  the  dif- 
ference between  the  historical  part  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  myths  of  heathen- 
ism. Still  they  considered  the  historical 
part  and  the  letter,  only  as  a  covering  for 
those  general  ideas,  which  it  was  the 
loftiest  purpose  of  the  Divine  revelations 
to  communicate  to  men  of  a  spiritual  turn ; 
but  yet  they  still  altogether  decided  upon 
the  objective  reality  and  truth  of  the  his- 
tory and  the  letter,  and  ascribed  indeed  to 
both  their  use,  as  a  means  of  moral  and 
religious  improvement  for  those  who  were 
unable  to  lift  themselves  up  to  that  height 
of  speculation  and  contemplation.  Only 
in  certain  places,  where  they  found  things 
which  they  could  not  make  to  square  with 
their  religious  philosophy,  where  they  en- 
tered into  controversy  with  the  sense- 
bound  interpreters  of  the  Bible,  (who,  it 
must  be  confessed,  by  taking  even  the 
minutest  matters  literally,  fell  into  many 
very  crude  notions,  as,  for  instance,  in  the 
history  of  Paradise,  and  of  the  fall  of  man,) 
they  were  unable  to  keep  close  to  this 
general  principle,  that  the  Spirit  always 
appeared  clothed  in  a  real  body.     Instead 


•  A  remarkable  instance  of  this  occurs  in  his 
treatise,  Quis  rcr.  div.  hxresl  p.  492,  (p.  3.34,  Ed. 
Turneb.)  where  the  phrase  i^i-yvit  t^co  etrikes 
Philo,  and  he  searches  for  a  peculiar  and  profound 
sense  in  the  addition  i^a>. 
5 


33 


of  acknowledging  an  objective  fact  of  deej) 
importiince  for  the  development  of  the 
whole  nature  of  man,  in  the  symbolical 
language  of  the  ancient  traditions,  they 
saw  only  a  general  idea  clothed  in  a  mys- 
tical dress.  Here  they  considered  tlie  let- 
ter of  the  narration  only  as  a  fable,  en- 
tirely devoid  of  all  historical  truth  (to 
f»)Toi'  (jLv^uhi  ia-n,  according  to  Philo.) 
And  this  they  reconciled  thus  with  their 
principles  :  in  order  that  spiritual  men 
should  not  be  induced  to  hold  entirely  by 
the  bare  letter,  without  searching  for  the 
idea  enveloped  in  the  covering  of  the  let- 
ter, some  means  of  exciting  their  attention 
nmst  be  resorted  to  by  scattering  about  a 
few  places,  in  which  the  letter  gives  no 
reasonable  sense  (ra  ay.a.n^a.'Ka.  ta?  y^*^*)?, 
a.(po^jjLXi    Ton    Tv(p\on;    rrjt    Stxytoy).      This 

principle  naturally  admitted  of  a  great 
laxity  and  caprice  in  its  application,  and 
might  perliaps  lead  to  this  result,  that 
every  one  would  allow  only  exactly  so 
much  of  the  Scripture  to  hold  good,  as  he 
could  comfortably  reconcile  with  his  own 
subjective  habits  of  thought,  although 
Philo  was  most  undoubtedly  very  desirous 
to  keep  up  all  respect  for  the  holy  Scri{>- 
ture.  But  this  is  the  manner  in  which  a 
speculative  or  contemplative  pride  pun- 
ishes itself,  which  despises  history  and 
the  letter,  while  it  fancies  itself  capable 
of  knowing  every  thing  a  priori. 

Philo  was  perfectly  right  in  combating 
the  sensuous  anthropojmthism  of  those 
Jewish  rabbis ;  but  here,  as  it  often  hap- 
pens, in  avoiding  one  error,  he  fell  into 
another  of  an  opposite  character,  by  mis- 
taking and  overlooking  the  objective  and 
real  truths,  which  were  at  the  ground- 
work of  that  anthropopat Ideal  form,  in 
which  they  were  delivered, — a  form  ne- 
cessary, not  only  to  the  multitude,  (rot; 
TroAAoj?)  but  to  man  as  man,  who  can  only 
contemplate  the  Divine  under  the  analogy, 
refined  indeed  and  ennobled,  but  still  the 
analogy,  of  the  human. 

Philo  suggests  the  enquiry  :  IIow  can 
Moses  attribute  to  God,  who  is  far  above 
all  parties  and  changes,  anger,  zeal,  and 
other  similar  human  things }  and  he  an- 
swers :  Moses  has  Iiere,  like  a  wise  law- 
giver, let  himself  down  so  as  to  meet  the 
wants  of  rude  sense-led  men,  incapable 
of  tlie  contemplation  of  pure  tnith,  who 
must  at  first  be  restrained  from  evil  by  the 
fear  of  punishment.  "  Let  all  such  per- 
sons, therefore,"  says  he,  "  learn  those 
false  things,  by  which  they  may  be  pro- 
fited, if  they  are  unable  to  be  amended  by 
truth ;  for  the  most  approved  physicians 


THE  HUMANIZING  AND  THE  NOT-HUMANIZING  SYSTEM. 


34 


tlare  not  tell  the  truth  to  those  who  are 
dangerously  ill,  because  they  know  that 
this  will  depress  them,  and  the  disease 
will  gain  strength."*  Philo  here  did  not 
remember,  that  the  fear  of  punishment 
can  at  most  only  restrain  the  open  out- 
break of  vice,  while  the  man  remains  un- 
touched by  that  true  inward  sanctification 
of  the  heart,  which  religion  is  meant  to 
impart.  Like  those  heathen  Platonizers, 
he  did  not  consider  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment notion  of  God's  anger  contains  a 
great  truth  represented  in  human  language, 
the  truth  of  the  reality  of  sin  and  guilt, 
the  objective  opposition  of  evil  and  God's 
holiness ;  a  truth  to  which  the  voice  of 
the  conscience  bears  witness  in  the  soul 
of  the  philosopher,  and  of  the  man  of 
highly  cultivated  mind  in  a  human  sense, 
as  well  as  in  the  souls  of  the  so-called 
uncultivated  multitude.  In  the  conscience 
of  the  philosopher,  as  well  as  in  that  of 
the  despised  multitude,  the  anger  of  God 
from  heaven  reveals  itself  on  all  unright- 
eousness of  men  (of  which  every  one  can 
find  sufficient  within  himself,)  who  hold 
the  truth  in  ungodliness ;  and  therefore, 
there  existed  between  these  Idealists,  who 
spiritualized  every  thing,  and  the  Mate- 
rialists, who  understood  every  thing  in  a 
sensuous  manner, — or,  to  use  Philo's 
phrase,  between  the  spiritual  man  and  the 
man  of  mere  sense, — a  controversy  which 
never  could  be  decided,  because  each 
stuck  fast  to  his  half-truth  and  to  the  er- 
rors which  he  had  mixed  up  with  it.  The 
Idealists  could  not  bear  the  representation 
of  God  according  to  our  sense.  The 
Materialists  could  not  bear  to  dilute  and 
wash  away,  as  mere  anthropopathism,  that 
which  there  was  of  positive  in  their  no- 
lions,  and  which  proved  itself  true  in  the 
very  deepest  foundations  of  their  moral 
and  religious  conscience. 

Philo,  therefore,  came  to  this,  that  he 
opposed  to  each  other  two  different 
methods  of  considering  God  and  Divine 
matters,  as  taking  their  origin  from  two 
different  points  of  view,  namely,  the  hu- 
manizing, and  not-humanizingi  (or  that 
in  which  God  is  represented  as  a  man,  and 
that  in  which  he  is  not.)     In  the  first,  all 


•  Deum.  immutab.  p.  302,  303,  (p.  204.  ed. 
Turneh.) 

■j"  '¥.v  fxiv,  cTt  ou^  J,c  cvS^amc  o  ©esc,  Irfpcv  ii.  In 
if  (;v6ga)T5f  1.  c.  p.  301.  (p.  204,  ed  Turneb.) 
Philo  thought  he  found  these  two  difierent  methods 
in  Nuinb.  xxiii.  19,  compared  with  Deuteronomy 
i.  31:  the  same  dilTercnce  which  later  Christian 
mystics  made  between  a  Sahoyix  CTrcp^riKH,  and  a 

flKAiJ/**  K-i.T»ip*TflUI. 


liuman  qualities  are  attributed  to  God,  for 
the  advantage  of  those  men  who  are  to 
be  bettered,  but  are  still  incapable  of  pure 
spiritual  contemplation  (tt^o?  ttiv  rm  woAAwr 
^i^otjy.ccXiODi);  in  the  other  point  of  view, 
that  of  pure  truth,  all  positive  ideas  are 
removed  from  the  contemplation  of  God 
for  spiritual  men,  who  are  capable  of 
taking  such  a  view.  The  being  of  God 
only,  apart  from  all  qualities,  here  be- 
comes conceived  by  means  of  an  imme- 
diate communion  of  the  spirit  with  this 
great  Being,  and  by  means  of  an  intellec- 
tual contemplation  raised  far  above  any 
definite  ideas.* 

Philo,  who  explained  himself  (see 
above)  so  clearly  against  the  mysteries, 
nevertheless  brought  himself  here  to  dis- 
tinguish two  points  of  view  in  the  know- 
j  ledge  of  religion  from  each  other,  the 
;  esoteric  and  the  exoteric.  There  we  find 
i  an  intellectual  intuitionj"  of  God's  being, 
which  raises  itself  above  all  syllogistic^ 
thought,  and  above  all  positive,  historical 
revelation  of  God,  but  wliich  is  the  first 
thing  that  teaches  us  to  recognise  tlie  in- 
ward sense  of  Scripture,  which  is  enve- 
loped in  the  symbol  of  the  letter ;  an  al- 
legorical interpretation  of  Scripture,  pro- 
ceeding from  this  point  of  view;  a  love 
of  the  Most  High  for  himself  alone,  for 
his  overwhelming  perfection,  wliich  can 
dispense  with  all  other  sources  of  reli- 
gious amendment.  Here  we  see  an 
anthropopathical  conception  of  God,  as 
the  Most  High  represents  himself  to  the 
man  of  sense-led  mind,  by  letting  himself 
down  to  this  point  of  view ;  an  adherence 
to  the  letter  of  Scripture,  without  being 
able  to  penetrate  into  its  inward  spirit;  a 
carnal,  literal  interpretation  of  the  Bible; 
the  hope  of  reward,  and  the  fear  of  pun- 
ishment, as  springs  of  action  and  of  life 
to  man.§ 

These  opinions,  indeed,  pushed  to  ex- 
tremes, lead  to  this,  that  we  are  to  con- 
sider positive  religion  merely  as  a  means 
of  instruction  for  the  multitude,  which 
the  wise  man  may  easily  dispense  with, 
and  which  has  no  meaning  as  addressed 
to  him.     And  they  were,  in  fact,  really 

*  OuJi/uit  ra>v  yfryonTotv  iSit  TigiSitKXcvTi  to  ov, 
SiX\'  exjfi.'ySitravTS;  uuro,  i  tto  Tri-o-m  TrcKTinof  -^txuv  uvfv 
yciejtx.ri:^i(  Tuv  uTTJ^^it  K-Jc.r-jAxu&JnirB'*.!,  thy  kxtu.  to 
iivJU  pav,T5t<ri*v  /acvx  evfefs^iVTc,  y.h  /w.^pKruvn;  auto. 

j-  [An-ichauurig.  See  Translator's  Preface  to 
the  second  part  of   this  work.      H.  J.  R  ] 

i  [Difikursive.     See  Preface.     H.  .1.  K.] 

^  According  to  Philo  the  knowlcdi^e  of  the  cr 
as  Iv,  the  »</«t»  xxt«a«4'>  '''"'  '>"'''f  >  '*'^''  ^^^^  know- 
ledge of  the  CK  also  in  the  Atjo?,  makes  us  uloi  tm 
«yTjf,  and  uiot  tcu  Aey^v. 


ULTRA  IDEALISTS — THE  SECT  OF   THERAPEUT^. 


35 


pushed  to  extremes  by  many  at  Alexan- 
dria. '"  The  observance  of  outward  wor- 
ship," they  said,  "belongs  to  the  multi- 
tude; we,  who  know  that  all  is  only  the 
symbolic  garb  of  spiritual  truth,  we  have 
all  and  quite  sufiicient  in  the  contemplation 
of  this  truth,  and  need  not  to  trouble  our- 
selves about  the  outward  part  of  religion." 
But  the  more  moderate,  like  Philo,  by 
means  of  the  pure  feelings  of  humanity 
within  them,  by  their  desire  after  religious 
Cdininunion,  and  by  their  reverence  for  the 
law  of  Moses,  and  the  dealings  of  God 
with  their  people,  were  held  back  from  this 
violent  contrast  to  the  religion  of  the  peo- 
ple. Philo  says  of  those  stricter  and  more 
violent  Idealists,  "  As  if  they  lived  for 
themselves  alone  in  the  desert,  or  as  if 
they  were  souls  without  bodies,  and  knew 
nothing  of  social  intercourse,  they  de- 
spise the  faith  of  the  multitude,  and  are 
willing  only  to  investigate  pure  truth,  as 
it  is  in  itself,  and  yet  the  word  of  God 
ought  to  teach  them  to  strive  after  a  good 
name  among  the  people,  and  not  to  violate 
prevailing  customs,  which  godly  men,  of 
a  higher  grade  than  we  are,  have  estab- 
lished. As  men  must  provide  for  the  body, 
which  is  the  house  of  the  soul,  so  also 
must  they  for  the  observance  of  the  letter 
of  the  law.  If  we  keep  this,  that  also  of 
which  the  letter  is  the  symbol  becomes 
clearer,  and  we  escape,  at  the  same  time, 
blame  and  reproaches  from  the  people."* 
It  was  natural  enough,  that  this  prevailing 
contemplative  telidency  of  the  religioiis 
spirit  should  at  the  same  time  introduce 
in  Egypt,  (afterwards  the  native  land  of 
the  anchorite  and  monkish  habits  among 
Christians,)  the  formation  of  thensophic 
and  ascetic  societies,  which  withdrew 
themselves  from  the  world.  Philo  him- 
self relates  that,  in  order  to  collect  him- 
self within  more  still  and  undisturbed,  he 
had  often  withdrawn  into  the  desert,  but 
that  he  had  learned  by  experience,  that 
man  does  not  become  free  from  the  world, 
which  he  carries  about  within  him,  by  an 
outward  withdrawal  from  it;  nay,  that 
just  exactly  in  outward  Solitude,  where 
the  lower  powers  of  human  nature  are 
unemployed,  it  has  from  that  very  cause 
more  power  to  distract  and  afflict  him. 
Let  us  hear  his  own  words.  (Leg.  Allcgor. 
B.  II.  p. 81,  vol.  i.  Mangey's  edition.)  "  I 
often  left  relations,  friends,  and  country, 
and  retired  into  the  desert,  that  I  might 
raise  myself  to  worthy  contemplations; 
but  in  this  I  did  not  succeed  ;  and,  on  the 


contrary,  my  spirit  either  became  distract- 
ed, or  it  was  wounded  by  some  impure 
impression.  At  times,  however,  in  the 
midst  of  thousands,  I  find  myself  alone, 
while  God  represses  the  tumult  of  the  soul, 
and  teaches  me,  that  it  is  not  the  difference 
of  place  which  creates  evil  or  good,  but 
that  it  depends  on  God,  who  leads  the 
ship  of  the  soul  whither  he  will."  Philo 
felt  it  necessary,  as  he  considered  the 
union  of  the  contemplative  and  of  the 
practical  life  the  loftiest  purpose  of  human 
nature,  to  caution  men  against  a  partial 
over-estimate  of  the  contemplative.*  He 
was  obliged  even  then  to  speak  against 
those  who,  either  from  laziness  or  vanity, 
had  retired  into  the  life  of  ascetics  and 
hermits,  and  hid  their  inward  baseness 
under  the  appearance  of  holiness,  like  the 
later  Christian  monks.  (De  Profugis,  455. 
p.  309,  ed.  Turn.)  "  Truth  may,  indeed, 
with  justice  blame  those  who  leave  the 
occupations  and  trades  of  civil  life  with- 
out having  tried  them  in  their  own  per- 
sons, and  then  say,  that  they  have  despised 
honour  and  pleasures.  They  pretend  that 
they  despise  the  world,  but  they  despise 
it  not.  A  slovenly  appearance  and  a 
crabbed  look,  a  strict  and  sparing  life, 
they  use  as  baits,  as  if,  forsooth,  they  were 
friends  of  strict  manners  and  self-com- 
mand ;  but  they  are  unable  to  deceive  deep 
observers,  who  can  look  at  what  is  within, 
and  who  do  not  suffer  themselves  to  be  de- 
ceived by  superficial  appearances."  Philo 
wished  that  only  those  who  had  been 
proved  by  active  virtue  in  civil  life,  should 
pass  over  to  the  contemplative,  just  as  the 
Levites  were  not  allowed  to  leave  the 
active  service  of  the  Temple  before  their 
fiftieth  year. 

One  particular  phenomenon,  which  re- 
sulted from  this  theosophico-ascetic  spirit 
among  the  Alexandrian  Jews,  was  the 
sect  of  the  Therapeut2e.|     Their  head- 


*  De  Decalogo,  p.  760. 

■j-  [The  reader  will  find  a  most  elaborate  discus- 
sion on  this  subject  (or  rather  on  the  Essenes  in 
general)  by  Salinasius,  in  his  edition  of  Solini 
Polyhir.tor,  vol.  i.  p.  610;  and  in  Calmct's  Diet, 
of  the  Bible,  Art.  Therapeutic.  The  head-quar- 
ters of  the  Therapeutffi  arc  here  placed  near  the 
lake  Mocri'5.  The  word  in  German  is  Moris-see, 
which,  as  far  as  I  can  see  from  Mannert  (Geogra- 
phic dcr  Griechen  und  Riimer,)  can  only  be  so 
translated.  From  Brucker,  Hist.  Philosoph,  vol. 
ii,  p.  780,  and  from  the  original  passage  in  Philo 
I  de  Vita  Contem|)lativa,  p.  892,  (or  in  Mangey's 
I  Edit,  vol.  li.  p.  784,  and  Turneb,  p.  611,)  I  am 
i  inclined  to  believe  lliat  the  spot  was  on  the  marshy 
'  lake  of  Mareatis,  which  was  close  to  Alexandria. — 


De  Migrat.  Abrah,  402. 


'  H.  J.  R.] 


36 


CARNAL  MIND  OF  THE  JEWS  AND  CHRISTIANITY. 


quarters  were  at  no  great  distance  from  1 
Alexandria,  in  a  quiet   pleasant  spot  on 
the   shores   of  the    Lake   Moeris,  where 
they  lived,  like  the  anchorites  in  later  pe- 
riods, shut  up  in  separate  cells,  (o-i/LivEfotj, 
Ixo^xa-TvpiOK;^)  and  employed  themselves  in 
nothing  but  prayer,  and  the  contempla- 
tion of  Divine  things.     An  allegorical  in- 
terpretation of  Scripture  was  the  founda- 
tion of  their  speculations,  and  they  had 
old  theosophical  writings  which  gave  them 
this  turn.     They  lived  only  on  bread  and 
water,  and  accustomed  themselves  to  fast- 
ing.    They  only  ate  in  the  evening,  and 
many  fasted  for   several    days    together. 
They  met   together   every   Sabbath-day, 
and  every  seven  weeks  they  held  a  still 
more  solemn  assembly,  because  the  num- 
ber seven  was  peculiarly  holy  in  their  es- 
timation.    They  then  celebrated  a  simple 
love-feast,  consisting  of  bread  with  salt 
and  hyssop:  theosophical  discussions  were 
lield,  and  the  hymns,  which  they  had  from 
their  old  traditions,  were  sung;  and  amidst 
choral  songs,  mystical  dances,  bearing  re- 
ference to  the  wonderful  works  of  God 
with  the  fathers    of  their   people,  were 
continued    to  a  late   hour  in  the  night. 
Many  men  of  distinguished  learning  have 
considered  this  sect  as  nothing  but  an 
offset  of  the  Essenes,  trained  under  the 
peculiar  influence  of  the  Egyptian  spirit. 
But  there  was  no  such  connexion  between 
these  two  sects,  that  we  should  necessa- 
rily conclude  the  one  to  have  been  out- 
wardly derived  from  the  other.     We  do 
not  knovv  that  the  Essenes  extended  be- 
yond  Palestine,  and  the    origin    of  the 
Therapeutic  sect  may  very  fairly  be  de- 
duced from  the  peculiar  theosophico-as- 
cetic  disposition  of  the  Egyptian  Jews. 
It  has,  however,  been  attempted  to  sup- 
port this  derivation  of  the  one  from  the 
other,  from  the  sameness  in  the  meaning 
of  their  names,  by  deriving  the  Essenes 
from  the  Chaldaic  tDXi  vhysician^  in  re- 
ference to  the  healing  either  of  the  body 
or  of  the  soul,  or  both ;  and  Pliilo  him- 
self deduces  the  name  of  the  Therapeutte 
from  the  Gs^awaa  td?  ^J'l'x^5?.  although  cer- 
tainly the  other  derivation,  which   Philo 
gives,  is  more  consonant  to  the  Alexan- 
drian   theosophic    idiom,   namely,    from 
fis^aweta  tow  ©so-j.  the  truz  Spiritual  wor- 
ship of  God^  making  them  thus,  fisgawif- 
Ta»  Tof  Qtov — TOW  o»To? :  the  worshippers 
of  God,  xar'   i^ox,*!*-,  nien  who  dedicate 
their  whole  lives  to  the  worship  of  God 
in  the  spirit,  and  to  the  contemplation  of 
God.*     What  Philo  says,  that  the  sect  of 
*  We  frequently  find  in  Philo  expressiomi  of 


Therapeutae  had  spread  much  among  the 
Hellenes  and  the  Barbarians,  is  well 
worthy  of  remark,  not  as  if  the  members 
of  this  particular  sect  of  Therapeuta;  had 
been  thus  dispersed,  but  as  if  that  general 
theosophical  and  ascetic  disposition,  from 
which  theTherapeutaj  derived  their  origin, 
had  many  supporters  among  the  Jews  in 
other  districts,  ftlany  of  the  seven  Jew- 
ish sects,  whose  names  only  remain  to 
us,  may  have  derived  their  origin  from 
this  very  disposition. 

If,  from  this  representation  of  the  reli- 
gious tendencies  of  the  Jews,  we  attempt 
to  deduce  the  result  which  they  would 
give,  as  to  the  reception  of  Christianity, 
we  shall  immediately  observe,  that  with 
the  greater  part  of  the  Jewish  people,  the 
most  serious  obstacles  to  their  capability 
of  receiving  the  Gospel,  arose  from  their 
carnal  disposition,  which  was  anxious  to 
use  the  heavenly  as  a  means  of  obtaining 
the  earthly,  from  the  want  of  an  heartfelt 
thirst  for  moral  and  religious  things,  and 
from  their  reliance  on  tiieir  unalienable 
birth-right,  as  the  children  of  Abraham 
according  to  the  flesh,  and  on  the  merits 
and  sanctifying  power  of  their  ceremonial 
law.  It  might  easily  happen,  that  where 
men  of  this  cast,  moved  by  some  momen- 
tary impressions,  embraced  Christianity, 
they  should  err  again  in  their  faith,  and 
fall  away  again  from  Christianity,  because 
they  did  not  find  their  carnal  expectations 
instantly  realised,  and  because,  with  their 
carnal  hearts,  they  were  unable  to  receive 
the  witness  of  the  Spirit  for  Jesus,  as  the 
Messiah.  And,  even  if  they  remained 
outwardly  Christians,  they  were  never 
taken  by  the  true  spirit  of  the  Gospel; 
they  conceived  Christianity  itself  in  a 
carnal  manner,  mixing  it  up  with  all  their 
Jewish  imaginations,  and  they  made 
merely  a  new  sort  of  opus  operalum  of 
faith  in  Christ,  without  its  having  any  in- 
fluence on  their  inward  life.  These  were 
men  who,  as  Justin  Martyr  says,  in  his 
Dialogue  with  Trypho,  deceived  them- 
selves, by  supposing  that,  even  though 
they  were  sinnprs,  yet  if  they  merely  ac- 
knowledged God,*  the  Lord  would  not 


this  sort,  which  arc  synonymous — Tiiio(  ^ifixvairouv, 
yivo;  iKiTixcv,  ry&oc  op-JLTlnov,  o  i^^cuiK — Jvw  isgav  toy 
ee;i'. — De  Victijn.  Offerentib.  854.  "Jkstsu  x.m  Bi^st- 
TTwrat  Tou  oyTO!;  iym. — De  Monarchia,  816.     'Av- 

— Dc  Decalogo,  7C0. — Ol  ncKK-i  x^V^  <ppxo-svTK 
TAK  dKX^K  ■Tre-xyuiTilMi,  c,Ttt.\i  ty£ia-ity  rev  fiiov  6sga- 
3-6.*  eiyj. — Lib.  iii.  dc  Vita  Mosis,  681.  To  fis^a- 
TrarMcv  auTcu  (t«/  ©kw)  y&o;. 

*  ISome  such  pretended  acknowledgment  of  God, 
as  that  against  wliich  St.  John  contends  in  bis 
first  Epistle. 


SADDUCEEISM PHARISAISM ESSENISM. 


37 


impute  their  sins  to  them,  the  hypocrites 
ajrainst  whom  St.  Paul  often  speaks,  and 
the  mere  professors  of  Christianity,  such 
as  we  find  in  the  churches  to  which  St. 
James  wrote.  It  was  from  this  cause 
that,  as  Justin  Martyr  (Apol.  II.  p.  88,  or 
Apol.  I.  §  68.  ed.  Grabe,)  says,  Chris- 
tianity found  more  and  more  faithful  con- 
verts (irXtio»«j  x«»  (x\n^taTt(;ov;  X^Krrmt,- 
»ov{)  among  the  multitude  of  the  heathens, 
who  had  less  grounds  for  religious  trust, 
and  with  whom  Christianity  must  have 
utterly  contradicted  all  their  then  notions 
of  religion,  than  it  did  among  the  multi- 
tude of  the  Jews.  There  were,  however, 
as  the  Gospel  history  tells  us,  many  up- 
right men,  many  who,  although  they  ex- 
pected in  the  Messiah  the  founder  of  a 
visible  kingdom  which  should  appear  with 
outward  tokens,  yet  had  a  purely  spiritual 
notion  of  the  happiness  of  this  kingdom, 
and  thought  its  happiness  would  consist 
in  an  inward  communion  with  God,  and 
the  universal  dominion  of  good ;  men  who 
acknowledged,  that  a  general  purification 
and  the  healing  of  moral  evil  must  pre- 
cede the  foundation  of  this  kingdom,  and 
they  expected  these  effects  from  the  Mes- 
siah. Such  hearts  might  in  Jesus  recog- 
nise that  Son  of  God,  whom  they  longed 
for,  and  once  given  up  to  Him,  might  be 
made  free  by  the  influence  of  his  Spirit. 
And  those  also,  in  whom  a  carnal  mind 
prevailed,  and  yet  not  to  the  utter  extinc- 
tion of  all  capability  of  higher  impres- 
sions, those  in  whom  hitherto  there  had 
only  been  wanting  the  means  of  awaken- 
ing moral  and  religious  desires,  might  be 
led  to  the  Son  by  the  hand  of  the  Father, 
when  they  had  once  seen  before  them  the 
visible  coming  of  the  Son  of  God  and  had 
heard  his  voice,  or  even  if  He  spoke  to 
them  by  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
without  their  seeing  Him ;  and  thus,  as 
they  received  the  Son  without  prejudices, 
their  whole  habits  of  thought  and  their 
heart  might  then  be  spiritualised. 

When  we  estimate  the  effects  of  the 
different  habits  of  thought  among  the  Jew- 
ish theologians,  we  find  that  the  Gospel 
could  not  find  any  point  of  union  with  a 
system  like  Sadduceeism,  a  cold  system, 
which,  sliut  up  within  itself,  extinguished 
all  desires  of  a  more  lofty  nature.  The  Gos- 
pel might,  indeed,  work  its  way  to  man, 
even  through  the  covering  of  Sadduceeism, 
just  as  elsewhere ;  but  then  the  conversion 
must  have  been  one  wliich  his  previous 
habits  had  no  share  in  preparing,  and,  on 
that  account,  since  no  point  of  union,  no 
point  of  transition  appears  between  the  two 


systems,  we  cannot  think  of  any  mixture 
of  Sadducee  and  Christian  notions.  If  it 
be  suggested  tliat  such  a  mixture  may  have 
taken  place  in  certain  opponents  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  in  the  apos- 
tolic age,  we  must  say  that  this  has  been 
supposed  without  sufficient  reason,  be- 
cause the  appearance  which  it  attempts  to 
account  for  may  be  deduced  from  totally 
different  grounds.* 

With  the  Pharisees,  in  general,  the  ob- 
stacles to  an  acceptance  of  the  Gospel, 
were  their  pride,  their  belief  in  their  own 
righteousness,  and  their  want  of  sincerity. 
We  must  here  accurately  distinguish  be- 
tween the  two  classes  of  Pharisees  which 
we  remarked  above.  To  those  who,  al- 
though they  deceived  themselves,  did 
really  strive,  in  some  sense,  truly  after 
holiness,  at  length  some  light  of  the  Spirit 
might  make  plain  the  nothingness  of  those 
means,  by  which  they  sought  to  attain  it, 
the  covering  of  their  inward  corruption 
might  disappear  before  the  power  of  truth, 
and  their  desire  after  holiness  might  now 
become  a  road  to  lead  them  to  Christianity. 
The  painful  struggle,  which  St.  Paul  de- 
scribes, from  his  own  experience,  in  the 
seventh  chapter  of  the  Episde  to  the  Ro- 
mans, might  be  gone  through  by  them, 
and  bring  them  into  a  stedfast  quietness 
of  belief.  But  those  Pharisees,  who  came 
over  to  Christianity  without  any  such  ex- 
citement of  the  inward  man,  might  fall 
into  the  temptation  of  melting  down  and 
uniting  their  former  Pharisaic  notions  with 
Christianity,  and  not  recognise  Jesus  as 
their  Redeemer,  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
term,  because  they  still  trusted  in  their 
righteousness  of  works. 

Among  the  Essenes  and  other  similar 
mystics,  the  striving  after  inward  religion 
might  lead  them  to  Christianity,  but  yet 
in  their  contemplative  life  they  would, 
perhaps,  take  the  appearance  for  the 
reality,  and  think  they  had  more  than 
they  really  had ;  moving  round  and  round 
in  one  narrow  circle  of  ideas  and  feelings, 
they  were  likely  to  mistake  the  true  busi- 
ness and  the  true  wants  of  their  nature, 
and  to  reject  all  which  did  not  suit  that 
narrow  circle,  or  which  threatened  to  take 
them  out  of  it.  To  become  poor  in  spirit 
was  often  for  men  like  these  the  hardest 
trial,  for  it  compelled  them  to  renounce 
the  belief  they  cherished  of  their  own  in- 
tellectual and  spiritual  perfection.     They 


•  The  intermixture  of  certain  philosophic  or 
theosophic  notions  of  the  Jews  or  Greeks  witli  the 
Gospel. 

D 


ALEXANDRIAN  GNOSIS  AND  CHRISTIANITY. 


38 


were  the  less  able  to  determine  on  re- 
nouncing their  outward  demeanour  and 
observances,  because  these  were  closely 
connected  with  their  whole  mystical  re- 
ligious system ;  and  men  of  such  sects, 
although  their  inward  religious  feelings 
might  be  attracted  by  Christianity,  would 
find  it  hard  to  practise  such  self-denial  as 
utterly  to  renounce  the  whole  of  their 
former  notions,  and  entirely  give  them- 
selves up  to  the  new  birth  under  the  Gos- 
pel. A  kind  of  mixture  of  their  earlier 
theosophy  with  the  simple  truths  of 
Christianity  might  easily  take  its  rise 
among  them  ;  and  be  the  source  of  many 
sects  which  adulterated  Christianity,  the 
seeds  of  which  we  see  already  alluded  to 
in  the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Colos- 
sians,  and  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 

Among  the  Alexandrian  Jews  the  re- 
ception of  the  Gospel  was  not  hindered 
by  the  political  and  temporal  expectation 
of  the  Messiah,  nor  by  many  other  pre- 
judices which  prevailed  among  the  other 
Jews.  We  must  not,  however,  imme- 
diately conclude  that  these  Alexandrian 
Jews  were  free  from  all  the  common 
Jewish  expectations,  however  much  these 
expectations  were  spiritualized  by  them. 
Even  Philo  believed  that  the  Temple  of 
Jerusalem,  and  the  temple  worship,  were 
destined  to  remain  for  ever.*  Even  Philo 
believed,  that  had  the  Jews  once  turned 
to  God  in  any  signal  manner,  they  would 
have  been  at  once,  by  a  miracle  from 
heaven,  brought  back  from  all  the  people 
among  whom  they  had  been  scattered 
and  prisoners,  and  that  tlien,  in  virtue  of 
their  piety,  which  would  command  re- 
verence, they  would  remain  unattacked 
by  their  enemies  or  victorious  over  them, 
and  that  a  golden  age  would  come  forth 
from  Jerusalem.  The  spiritual  tendency 
of  their  religious  feelings  might  here  make 
men  more  capable  of  accepting  Christian- 
ity, and  Christianity  might  engraft  itself 
on  their  attempts  to  oppose  the  carnal  and 
literal  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  and  to  pe- 
netrate its  inward  sense  and  spirit.  Chris- 
tianity might  announce  itself  as  Gnosis, 
which  had  first  unfolded  the  true  spirit  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Christianity  showed 
that  the  golden  age  which  tlie  Alexandrian 
Jews  expected,  had  already  appeared 
in  spirit,  and  being  prepared  in  spirit, 
Avould  at  some  time  or  other  appear  also 
openly  to  their  view.  The  letter  of  an 
Alexandrian  Jew,  converted  to  Christian- 
ity, which  has  been  ascribed  to  Barnabas, 


gives  us  an  instance,  how  the  religious 
notions  of  Alexandria  might  become  a 
point  of  communication  and  prove  a  means 
of  conversion  to  Christianity.  There  were 
in  these  notions  many  other  religious  ideas, 
which  would  be  realized  by  Christianity. 
But  just  as  the  religious  idealism  of  the 
Alexandrian  school  might  be  attracted  by 
that  which  is  ideal  in  Christianity,  so  also 
on  the  other  hand,  the  diminution  of  the 
realistic  principle  in  their  religion  might 
hinder  the  reception  of  the  Gospel.  They 
had  no  expectation*  of  a  personal  Messiah, 
which  had  disappeared  even  among  many 
other  Jews,  who  had  received  an  Hellen- 
istic education,  like  Josephus,  and  there 
was  wanting,  therefore, an  essential  ground 
for  Christianity  to  fasten  on.  With  those 
of  the  Alexandrian  school,  as  with  those 
mystics,  it  might  happen,  that  in  their 
proud  religious  philosophy  they  shut 
themselves  up  against  all  new  religious 
impressions,  and  by  their  partial,  contem- 
plative, and  speculative  disposition  of  the 
heart  and  spirit,  deceiving  themselves 
about  the  true  condition  and  the  real  wants 
of  their  nature,  they  tried  to  become  poor 
in  spirit.  It  might,  therefore,  happen  that 
although  men  of  this  cast  were  attracted 
by  what  Christianity  offers  of  an  ideal 
kind,  they  could  not  conquer  themselves 
so  as  to  become  simple  and  single-hearted 
through  Christianity  and  in  Christianity. 
They  wished  to  melt  down  their  religious 
philosophy  and  amalgamate  it  with  Chris- 
tianity;  they  wished,  even  in  Christianity, 
to  keep  their  own  superiority,  and  to  in- 
troduce into  the  Christian  Church  the  dis- 
tinction between  an  esoteric  and  exoteric 
religion,  against  which  the  very  essence 
of  the  Gospel,  uniting  all  men  through  the 
communion  of  a  higher  life,  entirely  pro- 
tests,— a  distinction  which  afterwards  be- 
came the  source  of  so  many  errors.  Thus 
in  the  spiritual  and  idealistic,  as  well  as  in 
the  carnal  and  realistic,  spirit  of  this  age, 
we  cannot  but  observe  many  obstacles  to 
Christianity,  and  many  grounds  for  it  to 
work  upon,  and  also  many  causes  which 
threatened  to  adulterate  its  purity  by  the 
admixture  of  sti'anger  elements. 

Among  the  wonderful  dealings  of  God, 
by  which  the  coming  of  Christianity  was 
prepared,  must  be  placed  the  spreading 
of  the  Jews  among  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans. Those  among  them  who  belonged 
to  the  Pharisees  gave  themselves  much 


De  Monarchia,  822, 


*  We  are"  not,  however,  justified  in  concluding 
that  all  the  Jews  of  the  Alexandrian  school  thought 
I  with  Philo  on  this  subject. 


PROSELYTES  OF  THE  GATE. 


trouble  to  obtain  proselytes  •,  and  the  loss 
of  respect  for  the  old  popular  religion,  and 
the  unsatisfied  religious  wants  of  multi- 
tudes, furtliered  tlieir  views.  Reverence 
for  the  national  God  of  the  Jews,  as  a 
mighty  Being,  and  reverence  for  the  secret 
sanctuary  of  the  splendid  Temple  of  Jeru- 
salem, had  long  gained  admittance  among 
the  heathen.  Jewish  GoetcC  (enchanters, 
jugglers,  Stc.,)  permitted  themselves  to 
make  use  of  a  thousand  acts  of  delusion, 
in  which  they  were  very  skilful,  to  make 
an  impression  of  astonishment  on  the 
minds  of  those  around  them.  Confidence 
in  Judaism  had  in  consequence  made  such 
wide  progress,  especially  in  large  capital 
towns,  that  the  Roman  writers  in  the  time 
of  the  first  emperors  openly  complain  of 
it,  and  Seneca  in  his  book  upon  supersti- 
tion, said  of  the  Jews — "  The  conquered 
have  given  laws  to  the  conquerors."* 
The  Jewish  proselyte-makers,  blind  lead- 
ers of  the  blind,  who  had  themselves  no 
conception  of  the  real  nature  of  religion, 
could  give  to  others  no  insight  into  it. 
They  often  allowed  their  converts  to  take 
up  a  kind  of  dead  monotheism,  and  merely 
exchange  one  kind  of  superstition  for  an- 
other ;  they  taught  them,  that  by  the  mere 
outward  worship  of  one  God,  and  out- 
ward ceremonials,  they  were  sure  of  the 
grace  of  God,  without  requiring  any 
change  of  life,  and  they  gave  to  them 
only  new  means  of  silencing  their  con- 
science, and  new  support  in  the  sins 
which  they  were  unwilling  to  renounce ; 
and  hence  our  Saviour  reproached  these 
proselyte-makers,  that  they  made  their 
converts  ten  times  more  the  children  of 
iiell,  than  they  themselves  Avere.  But 
we  must  here  accurately  distinguish  be- 
tween the  two  classes  of  proselytes.  The 
proselytes  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word, 
the  proselytes  of  righteousness,  who  un- 
derwent circumcision  and  took  upon 
themselves  the  whole  of  the  ceremonial 
law,  were  very  different  from  the  prose- 
lytes of  the  gate,  who  only  bound  them- 
selves to  renounce  idolatry,  to  the  Avor- 
ship  of  the  one  God,  and  to  abstinence 
from  all  heathenish  excess,  as  well  as 
from  every  thing  which  appeared  to  have 
any  connexion  with  idolatry .|     The  for- 


•  Victoribus  victi  leges  dederunt. 

■}■  The  so-called  seven  precepts  of  Noah.  [Some 
remarks  on  the  precepts  of  Noah  will  be  found  in 
Dr.  Lardner's  Remarks  on  Dr.  Ward's  Disserta- 
tions. Dr.  Lardner  contends  that  there  Was  only 
one  kind  of  Proselytes.  Lardner's  Works,  in  4to, 
vol.  V.    H.J.  R.] 


39 


mer  often  embraced  all  the  fanaticism  and 
superstition  of  the  Jews,  and  allowed 
themselves  to  bo  blindly  led  by  their 
Jewish  teachers.  The  more  difficult  it 
had  been  to  them,  to  subject  themselves 
to  the  obserA'ance  of  the  Jewish  cere- 
monial law,  necessarily  so  irksome  to  a 
Greek  or  a  Roman,  the  less  could  they 
find  it  in  their  hearts  to  believe,  that  all 
this  had  been  in  vain,  that  they  had  ob- 
tained no  advantage  by  it,  and  that  they 
must  renounce  their  presumed  holiness. 
What  Justin  Martyr  says  to  the  Jews, 
Dial,  cum  Tryph.  350,  holds  good  of 
these  proselytes  :  "  The  proselytes  not 
only  do  not  believe,  but  they  calumniate 
the  name  of  Christ  twice  as  much  as  you, 
and  they  wish  to  murder  and  torture  us 
who  believe  on  Him,  because  they  are  de- 
sirous to  resemble  you  in  every  thing." 
The  proselytes  of  the  gate,  on  the  con- 
trary, had  taken  many  of  the  most  admi- 
rable truths  out  of  Judaism,  Avithout  be- 
coming entirely  Jews,  they  had  become 
acquainted  with  the  Holy  Scriptures  of 
the  Jews,  they  had  heard  of  the  promised 
messenger  from  God,  of  the  king  armed 
Avith  power  from  God,  of  whom  a  report 
had  been  spread,  as  Suetonius  says  in  the 
life  of  Vespasian,  c.  iv.,  over  the  Avhole  of 
the  East.  Much  of  that  which  they  had 
heard  from  their  JcAvish  teachers,  Avhose 
writings  they  had  read,  had  remained  dark 
to  them,  and  they  Avere  still  to  seek  in 
them.  By  the  notions  Avhich  they  had 
received  from  the  Jcavs,  of  one  God,  of 
the  Divine  government  of  the  Avorld,  of 
God's  judgment,  and  of  the  Messiah,  they 
Avere  more  prepared  for  tlie  Gospel  than 
other  heathens,  and  because  they  still 
thought  that  they  had  too  little,  because 
they  had  no  determined  religious  system, 
and  Avere  curious  after  more  insti-uction 
in  Divine  things,  and  because  they  had 
not  received  many  of  the  prejudices  Avhich 
SAvayed  the  JeAvs  ;  they  Avere  more  fitted 
to  receive  the  Gospel  than  many  of  the 
JcAVS.  From  the  very  beginning  they  must 
have  been  attentive  to  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  Avhich  secured  to  them,  Avithout 
making  them  Jews,  a  full  share  in  the 
fulfilment  of  those  promises,  of  Avhich  the 
Jews  had  spoken  to  them.  To  these 
proselytes  of  the  gale,  (the  (pcBoviJuvoi  rot 
©«o>,  the  E^ai/3£tf  of  the  New  Testament,) 
passed,  therefore,  according  to  the  Acts, 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  when  it  had 
been  rejected  by  the  blinded  Jews ;  and 
here  the  seed  of  the  Divine  Avord  found  a 
fitting  soil  in  hearts  desirous  of  holiness. 
There  were,  hoAvever,  doubtless,  among 


40 


THE  PROPAGATION  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


tlie  proselytes  of  the  gate,  some  who, 
wanting  in  proper  earnestness  in  their 
search  after  religious  truth,  only  desired, 
in  every  case,  an  easy  road  to  heaven, 
which  did  not  require  any  self-denial; 
and  who,  in  order  to  be  sure  of  being  on 


the  safe  side,  whether  power  and  truth  lay 
with  the  Jews  or  the  heathens,  sometimes 
worshipped  in  the  synagogue  of  Jehovah, 
sometimes  in  the  temples  of  the  gods,  and 
who,  therefore,  fluttered  in  suspense  be- 
tween Judaism  and  heathenism.* 


SECTION  I. 

THE  CIRCUMSTANCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY  WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  UNBELIEVING  WORLD. 

I.  Propagation  of  Christianity. 

II.  Jl  general  view  of  the  Propagation  of  Christianity,  of  the  ohstarles  which  opposed  it, 

and  of  the  means  and  causes  by  which  it  was  furthered. 


Christiaxity,  being  in  its  nature  only 
a  spiritual  religion  and  only  the  establish- 
ment of  a  kingdom  which  is  not  of  this 
world,  is  by  no  means  necessarily  de- 
pendent on  any  outward  worldly  circum- 
stances. It  can,  therefore,  find  equally 
free  access  to  men  living  under  institu- 
tions and  notions  the  most  widely  differ- 
ent, and  incorporate  itself  with  them, 
provided  they  contain  nothing  which  is 
immoral.  This  peculiar  character  of 
Christianity  must  always  render  its  pro- 
pagation more  easy  wherever,  as  in  its 
earlier  days,  the  preachers  of  the  Gospel, 
well  aware  of  its  spiritual  nature,  abstain 
from  intermeddling  in  the  affairs  of  this 
world.  That  Christianity  is  calculated  to 
enter  in  all  earthly  forms  of  life  and  rela- 
tions, and  yet  raise  man  by  its  spiritual 
influence  above  the  affairs  in  which  he  is 
engaged,  is  expressly  stated  by  a  Christian* 
of  the  early  part  of  the  second  century, 
when  speaking  of  the  life  of  his  fellow 
Christians.  *•'  The  Christians,"  says  he, 
"are  not  separated  from  other  men, either 
in  their  earthly  abode,  nor  by  language, 
nor  customs ;  they  never  inhabit  separate 
towns,  they  use  no  peculiar  speech,  no 
singular  mode  of  life. — They  dwell  in  the 
towns  of  Greeks,  or  of  Barbarians,  just  as 
chance  has  assigned  their  abode,  and  in- 
asmuch as  they  follow  the  customs  of  the 
country  with  regard  to  raiment,  food,  and 
other  such  matters,  they  show  a  temper 
and  conduct  M'hich  is  wonderful  and  re- 
markable to  all  men.  They  obey  the  ex- 
isting laws,  nay,  they  triumph  over  the 
laws  by  their  own  conduct."  But  as 
Christianity  incorporates  itself  with  every 
thing  that  is  pure  in  human  nature,  so 
must  it,  on  the  contrary,  struggle  most 


decidedly  with  all  that  is  ungodly  in 
mankind,  and  with  all  that  has  any  con- 
nexion and  relation  to  ungodliness.  Chris- 
tianity declared  itself  as  a  power  which 
should  work  a  reformation  in  man,  and 
form  his  character  anew,  Avhile  the  world 
endeavoured  to  maintain  its  old  ungodly 
ways.  The  old  man  struggled  every 
where  against  the  new  creation,  and  to 
this  did  the  saying  of  Christ  relate  :  ''•  I 
came  not  to  send  peace  upon  the  world, 
but  a  sword,"  the  sword  of  the  Spirit ; 
and  history  has  fully  verified  this  pro- 
phecy in  the  workings  of  Christianity 
among  mankind.  Christianity,  from  its 
very  beginning,  was  opposed  on  many 
points  to  the  prevailing  opinions,  as  well 
as  to  many  of  the  ruling  customs  and  in- 
clinations, which  the  spirit  of  a  holy  reli- 
gion could  not  tolerate.  Besides  this,  the 
Pagan  state-religion  was  so  closely  inter- 
woven with  civil  and  social  life,  that 
whatever  attacked  the  state-religion  must 
necessarily  come  into  hostile  contact  with 
the  different  relations  of  civil  and  social 
life.  This  struggle  might  indeed  have 
been  partially  avoided,  had  the  early 
Church,  like  the  Churches  of  later  days, 
been  inclined  to  humour  the  world,  had 
they  at  least  accommodated  themselves  to 
the  prevailing  manners,  even  when  op- 
})osed  to  Christianity,  merely  to  obtain 
more  followers.  But  the  first  Christians 
were  far  more  inclined  to  a  haughty  abo- 
mination of  every  thing  heathen,  and  even 


*  The  author  of  the  letter  to  Diognetua. 


*  Such  were  the  persons  painted  by  Commo- 
1  dianus  in  his  Instructiones,  the  inter  utrumque 

viventcs. 
I      Iiiler  utrumque  putans  dubie  vivendo  ravere 

Nudntus  a  lege  decrepitus  hixu  proccdis? 

Quid  in  synagogo  decurris  ad  Pharisffios, 

lU  tibi  misericors  fiat,  quern  dcnegas  ultro? 

Exis  inde  foris ,  iterum  tu  fana  requiris. 


RELIGION   OP  THE  SPIRIT. 


41 


of  that  which  had  merely  an  apparent 
connexion  wilh  Paganism,  than  to  any 
thing  like  a  lax  accommodation;  and  cer- 
tainly, for  the  preservation  of  the  purity, 
both  of  Christian  life  and  doctrines,  any 
excess  on  this  side  was  far  safer  than  on 
the  other.  The  religion,  then,  which  had 
to  combat  such  deep-rooted  notions  and 
manners,  which  threatened  to  shake  to 
pieces  that  which  was  fast  and  firmly  es- 
tablished by  its  antiquity, — this  religion, 
I  say,  came  from  a  people,  despised  for 
the  most  part  by  the  civilized  world ;  it 
found,  at  first,  its  readiest  acceptance 
among  the  lower  classes  -,  and  this  was 
of  itself  a  sufficient  reason  to  the  Romans 
and  the  Greeks,  proud  as  they  were  of 
their  superior  cultivation,  to  look  down 
with  contempt  upon  it.  They  recognised 
as  yet  nothing  but  the  superstition  of 
THE  PEOPLE,  and  the  religion  of  the 
PHILOSOPHER.  How  could,  then,  man 
have  hoped,  in  those  days,  to  learn  more 
in  the  market-places  than  in  the  schools 
of  the  philosophers  ?  Celsus,*  the  first 
writer  against  Christianity,  makes  it  a 
matter  of  mockery,  that  labourers,  shoe- 
makers, farmers,  the  most  uninformed  and 
clownish  of  men,  should  be  zealous 
preachers  of  the  Gospel,  and  that  they 
(especially  the  first)  chiefly  addressed 
themselves  to  women  and  children.  Of 
a  religion  for  all  mankind,  these  persons, 
proud  of  their  own  civilization,  who  would 
have  nothing  in  common  with  the  mass 
of  the  people,  had  no  conception  what- 
ever. It  was  their  constant  reproach 
against  Christianity,  that  it  required  only 
a  blind  belief  (wkttjv  t^Xoyot ;)  they  de- 
manded philosophical  grounds  for  what 
was  said. 

It  may,  perhaps,  be  urged,  that  the  old 
popular  religions  had  been  already  once 
shaken  by  the  assault  of  unbelief  and  had 
now  lost  all  their  authority.  There  is 
some  truth  in  this ;  but  on  the  other 
hand,  we  must  consider  well  that  men 
liad  betaken  themselves,  Avith  a  renewed 
fanaticism,  to  their  old  religions,  and 
hence  arose  the  bloody  combat  for  their 
maintenance.  The  cruel  rage  of  the  po- 
pulace against  the  Christians,  bespeaks 
decidedly  a  religious  character  among  the 
people  •,  and  probably  superstition,  called 
forth  bv  the  opposition  of  scepticism,  now 
more  than  ever  ruled  tlie  people,  and 
.some  portion  of  the  educated  world. 
With  regard  to  the  greater  part  ot  persons 
in  those  days  under  the  influence  of  super- 


stition, Plutarch  justly  makes  use  of  the 
saying  of  Heraclitus  about  the  dreamers 
of  the  night, — "  They  found  themselves 
awake  in  open  day,  in  a  world  of  their 
own  :"  a  world  which  was  closed  to  all 
beams  of  reason  and  truth.  Men  of  car- 
nal minds,  who  wished  to  see  their  gods 
with  their  own  eyes,  who  had  been  ac- 
customed to  carry  about  with  them  their 
gods,  either  in  signets  or  in  little  images, 
to  which  they  generally  attributed  the 
power  of  amulets  ,  how  often  did  men  of 
this  stamp  cry  out  to  tlie  Christians, 
"  Show  us  your  God  !"  and  to  men  like 
this  a  spiritual  religion,  which  brought 
with  it  no  worship,  no  temples,  no  vic- 
tims, no  images,  and  no  altars,  appeared 
so  bare  and  cold,  that  the  heathen  often 
made  it  a  matter  of  bitter  reproach. 

There  was,  however,  as  we  have  above 
remarked,  a  spirit  of  inquiry,  and  of  long- 
ing after  new  communications  of  heaven, 
shed  abroad  in  this  century ;  with  all  the 
obstinate  clinging  to  the  old  religion,  there 
were  yet  maniibld  capacities  at  Jiand  for 
new  religious  impressions.  But  this  long- 
ing, which  hardly  well  acquainted  with 
its  own  objects  and  aim,  was  only  led  by 
the  blind  impulse  of  feeling,  might  easily 
be  deceived,  and  easily  be  the  occasion  of 
every  kind  of  delusion.  Celsus,  indeed, 
already  imagined  that  he  could  illustrate 
the  rapid  propagation  of  Christianity  from 
the  fact,  that  in  this  time  so  many  en- 
chanters, (Goeten,  Greek  TorTat,)  who 
endeavoured  to  deceive  by  the  exhibition 
of  supernatural  powers,  found  a  ready 
belief  among  many,  and  for  the  moment 
excited  a  great  sensation,  which  of  course 
soon  subsided  again.  There  was,  how- 
ever, as  Origen  justly  represented  in  reply 
to  Celsus,  a  great  difl^erence  in  tlie  man- 
ner which  those  persons  used,  from  that 
made  use  of  by  the  preachers  of  the  Gos- 
pel. Those  deceivers  flattered  the  sinful 
inclinations  of  men,  and  forming,  them- 
selves upon  their  then  habits  of  thinking, 
they  required  no  sacrifices  from  their  fol- 
lowers of  any  thing  dear  to  them.  On 
the  contrary,  he  who,  in  the  earlier  ages, 
would  become  a  Cliristian,  must  tear  him- 
self away  from  many  of  his  darling  pas- 
sions, and  be  ready  to  sacrifice  every  thing 
for  his  faith.  TertuUian*  says,  that  more 
persons  were  deterred  from  embracing 
Christianity  from  fear  of  losing  their  plea- 
sures, than  from  the  danger  with  which 
their  life  was  threatened.  The  influence 
which  such  enchanters    exerted    on  the 


In  Origen,  c.  Cels.  III.  149. 
6 


De  Spectaculis,  c.  2. 

d2 


42 


HEALING    THE    POSSESSED IMPOSTURES. 


people,  was  a  new  hindrance  to  the  ope- 
ration of  Christianity.  It  was  obliged 
now  to  reach  the  hearts  and  spirits  of 
men,  tliroiigh  the  delusions  with  which 
these  iniposters  had  invested  the  con- 
science of  man  ;  the  examples  of  a  Simon 
Magus,  and  Elynias,  an  Alexander  of 
Abonoteichos,  show  us  how  this  sort  of 
men  opposed  the  reception  of  Christian- 
ity. Visible  miracles  were  needed  to  de- 
tach persons  from  the  influence  of  such 
deceptions,  to  arrest  their  attention,  and 
to  make  them  capable  of  higher  impres- 
sions. The  examples  from  the  Acts,  (ch. 
viii.)  of  the  manner  in  which  the  disciples 
of  Simon  Magus  were  withdrawn  from 
him,  and  from  ch.  xiii.,  of  the  way  in 
which  the  conversion  of  Sergius  Paulus 
was  prepared  ;  so  many  proofs  from  the 
Acts,  of  the  means  by  which  the  attention 
of  the  superstitious  multitude  was  attract- 
ed to  the  preachers  of  the  Gospel,  prove 
clearly,  that  the  miracles  efiected  what 
the  inward  power  of  the  Holy  Word,  for 
Avhich  these  miracles  first  paved  the  way 
to  men's  hearts,  never  could  have  effect- 
ed— or  at  least,  not  so  quickly,  without 
the  aid  of  these  miracles.  Through  these 
signs  and  tokens,  for  a  time,  the  Spirit 
of  God  supported  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  and  many  thus  were  conducted 
through  outward  things  to  inward  things, 
and  through  the  Corporeal  to  the  Spirit- 
ual. The  Fathers  often  appeal  to  such 
appearances  in  the  language  of  truth,  and 
even  before  heathens  themselves ;  and 
even  he  who  discriminates  the  fact  from 
tlie  views  with  which  it  is  brought  for- 
ward, must  nevertheless  recognise  its 
existence  and  its  influence  on  the  con- 
sciences of  men.  It  is,  therefore,  unde- 
niable, that  the  spreading  of  the  Gospel 
was  furthered  by  such  means.  Let  us  re- 
present to  ourselves  some  of  these  cir- 
cumstances, in  lively  connection  with  the 
nature  and  circumstances  of  those  times. 
A  Christian  meets  with  an  unhappy  man, 
blindly  possessed  by  the  superstitions  of 
lieathenism,  who,  being  sick  in  body  and 
mind,  has  in  vain  hoped  to  obtain  a  cure, 
both  in  the  temple  of  ^sculapius,  where 
so  many  expected  a  cure  by  means  of 
dreams  sent  by  the  god  of  health,*  and 
from  the  multifarious  incantations  and 
amulets  of  the  heathen  priests  and  dealers 
in  enchantment.  The  Christian  exhorts 
him  no  longer  to  seek  for  help  from  fee- 
ble and  dead  gods  ;  (or,  according  to  the 
then  prevalent  opinion  of  Christians,  at 


•  See  the  Orations  of  Aristides. 


the  hands  of  evil  spirits ;)  but  to  turn  to 
the  Almighty  God,  and  to  trust  in  Him, 
who  alone  can  help.  He  hears  those 
who  pray  to  Him  in  the  name  of  Him  by 
whom  He  has  redeemed  the  world  from 
sin.  The  Christian  introduces  no  magic 
formulae,  no  amulets  ;  but,  calling  on  God 
through  Christ,  he  lays  his  hand  on  the 
head  of  the  sick  man,  in  firm  and  faithful 
reliance  on  his  Saviour.  The  sick  man 
is  healed,  and  the  cure  of  his  body  leads 
to  that  of  his  soul.  There  were  besides, 
in  these  times  of  ferment,  when  the  bonds 
of  spiritual  and  moral  life  were  torn  in 
sunder,  a  multitude  of  persons,  sick  in 
body  and  in  mind,  who  found  their  in- 
ward spirits  utterly  convulsed — persons 
who  felt  themselves  seized  by  a  strange 
power,  to  which  their  wills  were  subject- 
ed, and  blindly  impelled  hither  and  thither, 
they  were  agitated  by  an  anxiety  of  which 
they  could  give  no  just  account.  All  the 
powers,  therefore,  of  darkness  and  de- 
struction would  bestir  themselves,  where 
the  power  of  healing  godliness  ought  to 
enter,  and  distraction  in  man's  nature,  with 
all  its  terrible  consequences,  would  na- 
turally there  ensue,  and  rise  to  the  highest 
pitch,  where  in  man's  nature,  the  peace 
of  heaven,  which  brings  all  things  into 
harmony,  ought  to  be  revealed.  The  un- 
happy man  believed  himself  possessed  by 
evil  spirits,  and  it  was  then  the  usually 
received  opinion,  that  they  were  the  cause 
of  such  convulsions.  There  were  many 
among  the  heathens  and  Jews,  who 
pretended,  through  the  means  of  incense, 
annointings,  simples,  amulets,  and  invo- 
cations of  the  evil  spirits,  in  enigmatical 
and  high-sounding  forms  of  words,  to 
be  able  to  exorcise  them.  Sometimes 
such  means  as  had  a  natural  efficacy  in 
healing,  sometimes  such  as,  through 
power  over  the  imagination,  which  has 
such  influence  in  these  cases,  cured  the 
patient  of  his  fancy  for  the  moment,  or 
repressed  it  by  promises  for  the  future. 
In  every  case  these  people  only  did  in- 
jury, while  they  strengthened  men  in 
their  superstition,  and  in  their  whole 
course  of  ungodly  existence ;  while  they 
fought  against  the  kingdom  of  lies  only 
by  the  power  of  lies,  and  drove  out  one 
evil  spirit  by  another.  Their  imposture 
was  unable  to  touch  the  inward  source 
of  evil,  which  lay  deeper,  and  by  which 
alone  any  real  cure  could  be  eflected. 
Our  Saviour  said  of  such  cases  : — "  How 
shall  one  go  into  a  strong  man's  house 
and  rob  him  of  his  goods,  unless  he  first 
bind  the  strong  man,  and  then  rob  his 


FACTS  FROM  THE  FATHERS. 


43 


house  ?"*  How  much  credit  such  exor- 
cists then  obtained,  we  may  judge  from 
the  tlianks  which  Marcus  Aurelius  ofiers 
uj)  to  the  gods,  because  he  had  been 
taught  by  a  philosopher  not  to  trust  those 
tales  of  incantations  and  exorcisms  which 
were  related  of  miracle  workers  and 
Gcetaj-t  An  unhappy  man  of  this  kind, 
after  seeking  help  in  vain  at  the  hands 
of  these  impostors,  comes  to  a  Christian  ; 
the  Christian  considers  him  possessed, 
and  feels  himself  by  no  means  called 
upon  to  inquire  more  precisely  into  the 
actual  cause  of  the  malady.  lie  knows 
that  his  Redeemer  had  overcome  the 
power  of  the  prince  of  this  world,  and 
that  to  him  all  the  powers  of  evil  must 
yield,  in  what  way  soever  they  show 
themselves.  He  calls  upon  him,  and  on 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  is  in 
him.  His  prayer,  which  calls  down  the 
power  of  Heaven,  works  deeply  on  the 
distracted  heart  of  the  patient.  Inward 
peace  follows  the  turbulent  tide  which 
agitated  him  within  ;  and,  conducted  by 
this  experience  of  the  influence  of  Chris- 
tianity on  himself  to  a  belief  in  it,  he  be- 
comes now,  in  every  sense,  for  the  first 
time  freed  from  evil  spirits,  and  healed 
through  the  enlightening  and  healing 
power  of  truth  so  thoroughly  and  for- 
ever, that  the  evil  spirit  returns  not  to  his 
house,  to  find  it  swept  and  garnished  for 
him. 

We  may  now  introduce  some  remark- 
able intimations  from  the  Fathers  of  this 
age  relative  to  such  facts.  Justin  Martyr, 
in  his  first  Apology,  (I.  45)  says  to  the 
heathen,  "  That  the  reign  of  evil  spirits 
has  been  destroyed  by  Jesus  Christ,  you 
might  ascertain  from  what  liappens  before 
your  own  eyes ;  for  many  of  our  people, 
of  us  Christians,  have  healed,  and  still 
heal,  many  possessed  by  evil  spirits  in  the 
whole  world,  as  well  as  in  your  city 
(Rome,)  adjuring  them  by  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  whom  Pontius  Pilate  cruci- 
fied; and  these  were  persons  who  could 
receive  no  relief  whatever  from  all  other 
exorcists."  Irenaeus  says,  (adv.  Hair.  lib. 
ii.  c.  22)  '■'■  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  his 
true  disciples,  who  have  received  grace 
from  him,  work  for  the  good  of  other  men, 
according  as  each  has  received  the  gifts 
from  him.   Some  cast  out  evil  spirits,  so  ra- 


*  The  power  of  evil  over  the  inmost  heart  of 
man  must  first  be  broken,  and  then  the  individual 
workings  of  this  evil  will  cease  of  them.selves. 

■(•   I.  6.     To  i^no-TXTWO/  TO/f  i/V;  Twy  Ti^trvjomm- 


dically  and  completely,  that  those  purified 
from  evil  spirits  often  become,  afterwards, 
themselves  believers  and  members  of  tlie 
community;  otiiers  heal  the  sick  by  the 
laying  on  of  hands.  Already  have  many 
even  been  raised  from  the  dead,  and  re- 
mained among  us  a  tolerable  number  of 
years.  There  are  innumerable  operations 
of  grace,  which  the  Church  has  received 
all  over  the  world  from  God,  and  daily 
brings  forth  for  the  advantage  of  the  hea- 
then, in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  who 
was  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  while 
it  deludes  no  one, and  seeks  no  gain;  for 
as  it  has  received  freely  from  God,  so  does 
it  freely  give.  It  performs  nothing  by  the 
invocation  of  angels,  nothing  through 
spells  and  other  evil  arts,  but  purely  and 
openly,  (not  with  hidden  arts  and  secret 
mysteries,  as  those  GcEta3  do,)  it  ofl"ers  up 
its  prayers  to  him,  who  has  created  all 
things,  while  it  calls  on  the  name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Origen  considered  these  manifestations 
of  supernatural  power  necessary,  especi- 
ally for  {]\Q  first  foundation  of  the  Church. 
(See  Origen  c.  Celsum,  lib.  viii.  edit.  Hoe- 
schel.  p.  420.)*  "  It  is  more,"  says  he, 
'^  through  the  power  of  miracles  than 
through  exhortation,  that  men  became  in- 
clined to  leave  the  religion  of  their  coun- 
try, and  to  take  a  foreign  one :  for  if  we 
judge  from  probability,  taking  into  account 
the  education  of  the  first  Church  commu- 
nity, it  is  scarcely  credible  that  the  apos- 
tles of  Jesus,  unlearned  and  ignorant  men, 
should  have  relied  on  any  thing  else,  in 
their  preacliing  of  Christianity  to  man- 
kind, than  on  the  power  which  was  be- 
stowed upon  them,  and  the  grace  of  God, 
which  accompanied  their  preaching ;  nor 
that  their  hearers  should  have  suffered 
themselves  to  be  detached  from  the  habits 
of  their  country,  deeply  rooted  in  them 
l)y  the  revolution  of  ages,  had  not  a  com- 
manding might  and  miracles,  entirely  op- 
posed to  those  things  among  which  they 
had  been  educated,  induced  them  to  be- 
come disciples."  And  in  the  seventh 
book  of  this  work,  he  says  also,  "y  In  the 
first  times  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and 
after  his  ascension,  more  visible  tokens  of 
the  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit  were  re- 
vealed, and  in  later  days  fewer.  Tliere 
still,  however,  remain  the  traces  of  these 
operations  among  some  few,  whose  souls 
have  been  purified  through  the  Word  of 
God,  and  a  life  corresponding  to  it." — 


•   [The  passage  occurs  p.  408,  ed.  Spencer,  but 
it  is  condensed  in  the  above  translation.  H.  J.  R.] 


44  CONDUCT    OF    CHRISTIANS ^MEANS    OP    CONVERSION. 

Origen  appeals  also  to  circumstances  of  I  ward  in  its  course.  As  the  Redeemer,  in 
which  he  was  an  eye-witness.  "Many  [his  prayer,  had  commended  the  faithful 
give  proofs  to  those  who  have  been  healed  |  to  his  heavenly  Father,  that  their  commu- 
through  their  power,  that  they  have  at-  nion  with  hun,  the  glory  received  from 
taiued  a  miraculous  power  through  this  the  Father,  which  he  bestowed  on  them, 
faith,  while  over  those  who  require  heal-  i  beaming  through  their  life,  might  lead 
iug,  they  invoke  no  other  power  than  the  men  to  believe  on  him,  so  it  came  to  pass. 
Almighty  God  and  Jesus  Christ,  together  i  The  witness  which  genuine  Christians 
with  the  preaching  of  his  Gospel.  There-  gave  of  their  Lord  through  their  conduct, 
by  have  I  seen  many  persons  rescued  the  healing  power  of  the  Gospel,  which 
from  severe  circumstances  of  delirium  and  revealed  itself  in  their  life,  Mas  a  most 
phrensy,  and  many  other  evils,  which  no  powerful  engine  in  the  conversion  of  the 
man,  and  none  of  your  demons,  could  heathen.  Justin  Martyr  appeals  to  this 
cure."*  And  in  another  place  Origen  as  matter  of  experience.  (Apol.  ii.  p.  63  ; 
says  these  remarkable  words  if--"  Though  or  in  Grabe's  Edition,  Apol.  i.  §  xx.  p.  30.) 
Celus  mocks  at  it,  yet  must  it  be  said  that  After  quoting  the  words  of  our  Lord,  '•'Let 
many  are  come  to  Christianity  against '  your  light  so  shine  before  men,  that  they 
their  will,  because  some  spirit,  through  may  see  your  good  works,  and  glorify 
visions  which  he  presented  to  them,  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven,"  he  adds, 
awake  or  in  the  dream,  led  their  reason  ;  "the  Lord  wills  not  that  we  should  recom- 
suddenly  from  hatred  against  Christianity  pense  evil  for  evil;  but  he  requires  of  us, 
to  a  zeal  which  gave  even  life  for  it.  jMuch  through  the  might  of  patience  and  gentle- 
of  this  kind  could  we  relate,  which  were  ness,  to  entice  all  men  out  of  the  disgrace 
we  to  set  it  down,  although  we  were  eye-  '  of  their  corrupt  desires ;  this  we  can  prove 
witnesses  of  it,  would  be  the  source  of  '  by  many  among  us,  who  from  violent  and 
much  mockery  to  the  unbelievers ;  but  tyrannical  men  have  become  changed  by 
God  is  the  witness  of  our  conscience,  that  [  a  victorious  might,  either  by  observing 
we  have  never  wished  to  spread  the  holy  how  their  neighbours  could  bear  all  things, 
doctrines  of  Jesus  Christ  through  false  or  by  perceiving  the  patience  of  their  de- 
reports,  but  through  many  undeniable  frauded  travelling  companions,  or  in  some 
facts."'!  j  way  or  other  by  the  intercourse  of  life, 

Nevertheless,  all  outward  dealings  and  ]  came  to  be  acquainted  with  the  life  of 
miracles  would  have  created  for  this  reli-  Christians."  The  distinguished  virtues 
gion  no  such  access  to  the  hearts  of  men,  of  the  Christian  must  then  have  come  far 
had  it  not  possessed,  in  its  inward  nature,  I  more  vividly  in  contrast  Avith  the  prevail- 
an  attractive  power  for  that  in  human  na-  ing  crimes  and  vices.  The  strictness  of 
ture,  which  is  related  to  God,  however  it  Christian  virtue,  sometim.es  carried  to  ex- 
may  be  darkened  and  overwhelmed,  either  cess,  in  contrast  with  an  universal  depra- 
by  false  refinements  or  through  carnal  vity  of  manners !  How  deep  an  impres- 
grossness.§  They  would  have  been  im-  sion  in  later  ages,  when  public  life  had 
availing,  had  it  not  shown  itself  victorious  '  taken  tlie  form  of  Christianity,  did  the 
over  all  the  impostures,  which,  taking  '  strict  life  of  the  monks  make,  wlicn  con- 
prisoner  the  human  mind,  opposed  it ;  i  trasted  with  the  corruption  which  pre- 
had  it  not  shown  itself  the  only  true  and  vailed  in  large  towns.  The  inward  bro- 
fundamental  source  of  satisfaction  to  the  therly  love  of  the  Christian, — contrasted 
religious  wants  excited  in  an  age  of  fer-  i  with  the  universal  selfishness  which  di- 
ment ;  had  it  not  proved  the  only  thing  vides  all  men  from  one  another,  and 
wiiich  would  create  for  the  spiritual  world  I  makes  them  distrustful  of  each  other, 
peace  and  tranquillity,  in  this  wild  ferment '  which  prevented  men  from  understanding 
of  opposing  elements  ;  and  had  not  tliis  the  nature  of  the  Christian  community, 
religion,  as  soon  as  it  had  once  taken  root  and  rendered  it  a  source  of  never-failing 
any  where,  by  the  activity  which  showed  j  wonder  to  them  I  "  See,"  said  they, "  how 
itself  in  it,  been  irresistibly  impelled  for-  '  tliey  love  one  another."  "  This  surprised 
. j  them  beyond  measure,"  says  Tertullian 

*  Lib.  iii.  p.  128.  [p.  124,  ed.  Spencer.]  (Apol.  c.  39,)  "  since  they  are  accustomed 

f  C.  Celsuin,  I.  v.  3.5.  [Lib.  i.  p.  35,  cd.  Spen-  to  hate  one  another,  that  one  man  should 
cp'-l  be  ready  to  die  for  another."     All  could 

i  Compare  with  these  words  of  Origen  what    j^^,    Hierefore,  be  cold  and   heartless  like 

TeitulUan  says,  de  Anima,  47.     Major  pane  vis    ,,  i-,.  •  i    n   i,   .  „  «^  „ i       c 

V      •         1     •  •      1      T»         1-       i.  the  nolilicians  we  sliall  have  to  speak  oi, 

homiiium  de  visionibus  Ueutn  discunt.  '     "*^"'"'  "^  '^  if 

§  In  men,  hominibus  ipsa  urbanitate  deccptis,  who,  accustomed  to  measure  every  tlimg 
06  Tertullian  says.  ,  by  their  own  limited  measure,  were  only 


OLORY  EVEN  IN  A  STATE  OF  SLAVERY. 


45 


distrustful  of  such  an  union.  The  heart, 
unhardened  by  predjudice  or  fanaticism, 
must  have  been  touched  at  the  impression 
of  such  an  appearance,  and  must  have 
made  the  inquiry,  '■  What  is  it  that  can  so 
bind  the  spirits  of  men  togetlier  ?'  hi  a 
time  of  shivish  cowardice  the  heroic  cou- 
rage of  faith,  with  which  the  Christians 
desired  death  as  soon  as  any  thing  against 
their  religion  was  required  of  them,  worked 
so  powerfully  on  men,  as  an  appearance 
quite  foreign  to  the  times,  that  they  made 
tliis  character  a  matter  of  reproach  to  the 
Christians,  as  a  thing  tilted  for  the  heroic 
days  of  antiquity,  but  not  for  these  more 
polished  and  more  efTenunate  days.* 
Though  the  ordinary  class  of  Roman 
politicians,  though  the  followers  of  world- 
ly love  which  delights  in  magnificence, 
though  the  cold  stoic  who  desires  demon- 
stration in  every  thing,  could  see  only  a 
blind  enthusiasm  in  the  spirit  with  which 
Christians,  who  were  called  upon  to  give 
witness  to  the  truth,  met  their  death;  yet 
the  sight  of  the  confidence  and  light- 
heartedness  of  sufTering  and  dying  Chris- 
tians must  have  made  an  impression  on 
many  more  yielding  or  more  impredju- 
diced  hearts,  must  have  disarmed  the 
prejudices  against  the  Christians,  and  have 
called  the  attention  of  the  world  to  that 
for  which  so  many  men  were  willing  and 
ready  to  give  up  every  thing,  and  which 
was  able  to  nerve  them  for  this  sacrifice. 
Outward  violence  could  effect  nothing 
against  this  inward  power  of  heavenly 
truth,  it  could  only  cause  the  might  of 
this  godly  truth  to  be  more  gloriously 
displayed.  TertuUian,  therefore,  closes 
his  Apology  with  these  words,  as  to  the 
persecution  of  the  Christians  :  "  There- 
fore all  the  refinements  of  your  cruelty 
can  effect  nothing,  or  rather  they  have 
brought  over  persons  to  this  sect ;  our 
number  augments,  the  more  you  persecute 
us.  The  blood  of  Christians  is  the  seed 
they  sow.  Your  philosophers,  who  e.x- 
hort  to  the  endurance  of  pain  and  death, 
make  not  so  many  disciples  as  the  Chris- 
tians through  their  deeds.  That  obsti- 
nacy which  you  upbraid  us  with,  is  an  in- 
structress. For  who  is  not  impelled, 
through  the  consideration  of  this,  to  the 
inquiry,  what  this  matter  can  be?  Who 
joins  us  not  as  soon  as  he  has  inquired  ? 
Who  wishes  not,  when  he  has  joined  us, 
himself  to  suffer  for  truth  .?" 


*  M'eW  enough  suited  to  the  ingenia  duriora 
robustioris  antiquitatis,  but  not  tlie  tranquillitas 
pacis,  and  the  ingenia  mitiora.  TertuU.  ad  Nat.  I. 
c.  18. 


At  a  season  when  the  earthly  glory  of 
the  old  world  was  nearly  at  an  end,  when 
all,  which  had  hitherto  given  a  certain  im- 
pulse to  the  souls  of  men,  was  growing 
old  and  fading  away,  Ctiristianity  appear- 
ed, and  called  mankind  from  the  old  fa- 
ding world  to  the  creation  of  a  new  one, 
destined  for  eternity ;  from  the  fading 
earthly  world  to  an  everlasting  glory, 
which  in  fliith  and  spirit  they  were  even 
now  capable  of  conceiving.  Augustin 
says  beautifully,  "  Christ  appeared  to  the 
men  of  a  world,  which  was  growing  old 
and  dying,  that  while  all  around  them 
faded  away,  they  might  receive  through 
him  a  new  and  youthful  life."  And  the 
higher  life  which  was  spread  abroad  by 
Christianity,  required  no  glittering  out- 
ward splendour,  like  all  which  man  had 
delighted  in  before,  to  reveal  its  glory. 
This  life  could  find  an  entrance,  even 
amidst  the  most  confined  and  oppressive 
circumstances  and  conditions,  and  let  its 
glory  shine  forth  in  the  most  dishonoured 
and  despised  vessels,  could  elevate  man 
above  all  which  tends  to  bow  him  to  the 
ground,  vviihout  making  him  overstep  the 
bounds  which  he  believed  a  higher  power 
had  assigned  to  his  station  in  the  world. 
The  slave  remained  in  all  his  worldly 
circumstances  a  slave,  fulfilled  all  his  du- 
ties in  that  station  with  greater  fidelity  and 
conscientiousness  than  before,  and  yet 
within  he  felt  himself  free,  and  showed 
an  elevation  of  soul,  a  confidence,  a  power 
of  faith  and  devotion,  which  must  have 
astonished  his  master.  The  men  of  the 
lower  orders,  who  hitherto  had  known 
nothing  of  religion  but  its  ceremonies  and 
its  fables,  received  hence  a  clear  and  con- 
fident religious  persuasion.  The  above 
cited  remarkable  words  of  Celsus,  as  well 
as  many  individual  examples  of  the  first 
times  of  Christianity,  show  us  how  often 
the  wide  spreading  of  the  Gospel  proceed- 
ed from  women,  who  showed  forth  the 
light  of  the  Gospel,  as  wives  and  mothers, 
amidst  the  corruption  of  heathen  manners, 
from  young  people,  from  boys  and  girls, 
from  slaves,  who  shamed  their  masters. 
'^  Every  Christian  handicraftsman,"  says 
TertuUian,  (Apol.c.46)  "  has  found  God, 
and  shown  him  to  thee,  and  can  teach 
thee  all,  in  fact,  which  thou  needest  to 
know  of  God,  although  Plato  (in  the  Ti- 
meeus)  savs  it  is  difiicult  to  find  out  the 
Creator  of  the  Universe,  and  when  you 
have  found  him,  impossible  to  communi- 
cate this  knowledge  to  the  multitude." 
And  Athenagoras  says,  "  Among  us  you 
will  find  ignorant  persons,  handicraftsmen, 


46 


SPREADING    OP   THE    GOSPEL. 


and  old  women,  who  although  they  could 
not  prove  to  you  by  words  the  healing 
influence  of  our  religion,  yet  by  their  ac- 
tions show  the  sahitary  power  of  the 
thoughts  which  it  communicates,  for  they 
learn  not  words  by  heart,  but  they  show 
good  works  ;  they  suffer  themselves  to  be 
smitten,  and  smite  not;  again,  when  they 
are  robbed,  they  do  not  go  to  law ;  they 
give  to  those  who  ask  from  them,  and  they 
love  their  neighbour  as  themselves." — 
Christianity  was  able  to  lower  itself  to 
the  sensuous  conceptions  of  those  whose 
spirits  were  not  calculated  to  receive  and 
develope  godlike  things  in  a  form  suited  to 
them  ;  it  laslened  itself  upon  the  dross  of 
their  earlier  and  fleshly  methods  of  think- 
ing, as  we  shall  see  in  the  notions  of  the 
Chiliasts,  while  they  had  nevertheless  re- 
ceived the  seed  of  an  hidden  and  godly 
life,  which  was  destined  by  and  by  to 
penetrate  the  whole  mass  of  their  nature, 
and  also  to  form,  lastly,  their  habits  of 
thought.  The  working  of  Christianity  in 
the  life  and  sufferings  of  Christians,  as 
well  as  isolated  parts  of  Christian  doc- 
trine, which  they  heard,  called  at  last  to 
Cliristianity  the  attention  of  philosophi- 
cally educated  heathen,  who  had  run 
through  nmliifarious  philosophical  and  re- 
ligious systems  to  find  religious  truth,  on 
which  they  might  rely,  and  which  could 
satisfy  the  wants  of  their  hearts  and  spi- 
rits— and  they  found  in  Christianity  what 
they  had  sought  in  vain  elsewhere. 

[B.]   On  the   spreading  of  the    Gospel   in 
various  Quarters  of  the  Wo7-ld. 

The  commercial  intercourse  of  various 
rations  had  already  pointed  out  and  paved 
a  way  for  the  propagation  of  the  Gospel. 
The  easy  communication  between  the  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  vast  Roman  empire,  the 
connection  of  the  Jews,  who  were  settled 
in  various  districts,  with  Jerusalem,  the 
connection  of  all  parts  of  the  Roman  em- 
pire with  Rome,  of  the  provinces,  with 
their  metropolitan  cities,  and  of  the  greater 
part  of  the  Roman  empire,  with  the  more 
considerable  capitals,  such  as  Alexandria, 
Antiochia,  Ephesus,  Corinih,  all  tended  to 
promote  this  object.  The  latter  cities, 
centres  as  they  were  of  mercanlile,  politi- 
cal, and  literary  communication,  became 
head-quarters,  where  the  first  preachers 
took  up  their  abode,  in  order  to  spread 
their  religion  ;  and  the  general  spirit  of 
commercial  intercourse,  which  from  early 
times  had  never  been  confined  to  the  mere 
exchange  of  earthly  commodities,  but  had  I 


also  served  for  the  interchange  of  intel- 
lectual treasures,  became  now  of  service, 
as  a  means  of  extending  a  knowledge  of 
the  highest  spiritual  treasures.  In  gene- 
ral, the  first  advances  were  made  by  Chris- 
tianity in  towns  ;  for,  since  it  was  of  the 
greatest  consequence  at  first  to  secure  es- 
tablished stations  for  the  propagation  of 
the  Gospel,  it  was  requisite  for  the  early 
preachers,  in  their  passage  through  any 
country,  to  preach  the  Gospel  at  first  in 
the  cities,  from  which  its  influence  might 
extend  over  the  country  by  the  exertions 
of  the  natives.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the 
country,  they  were  likely  to  meet  with 
far  greater  obstacles,  in  the  general  rude- 
ness, the  blind  superstition,  and  the  hea- 
then fanaticism  of  the  people,  as  well  as 
from  their  ignorance  in  many  cases  of  the 
language  of  the  country,  while  in  cities, 
for  the  most  part,  Greek  and  Latin  were 
sufficiently  intelligible.  We  know,  how- 
ever, from  Pliny's  report  to  Trajan,  from 
the  account  of  Clemens  Romanus,  (Ep.  I. 
ad  Corinih.  §  42)  and  from  the  relation 
of  Justin  Martyr,  (Apolng.  II.  98)  that 
this  was  not  universally  the  case,  and  that 
in  many  situations  country  communities 
were  formed  very  early  ;  and  Origen  says 
expressly  (c.  Cels.  iii.  p.  1 19)  "  tiiat  many 
had  made  it  their  business  to  go  through 
not  onjy  their  towns,  but  also  the  villages 
and  farms  (xat  xwpaj  xai  sTrafAt*;.")  The 
numerous  country  bishops,  in  insulated 
spots,  are  also  a  proof  of  this. 

In  the  New  Testament  we  find  ac- 
counts of  the  spreading  of  Christianity  in 
Syria,  Cilicia,  apparently  also  in  the  then 
widely  extended  empire  of  Parthia,*  in 
Arabia,  Asia  Minor,  and  the  neighbouring 
districts ;  Greece,  and  the  neighbouring 
districts,  as  far  as  lllyria,  and  in  Italy. 
We  are  much  in  want  of  authentic  ac- 
counts of  the  propagation  of  Christianity 
for  the  times  that  immediately  succeeded  ; 
for  later  stories,  which  arose  out  of  the  en- 
deavour to  deduce  every  national  Church 
from  an  apostolical  origin,  deserve  no  ex- 
amination. We  only  bring  forward  that 
on  which  we  can  rely.  The  old  story  of 
the  letters  that  passed  between  the  Abga- 
rus  Uchomo,  the  king  of  the  small  state 
of  Edessa,  in  Osrhoene  of  Mesopotamia, 
of  the  dynasty  of  the  Agbari,  or  Abgari, 


*  For  the  circumstance  that  St.  Peter  (1  Kp.  v. 
31)  sends  a  salutation  from  his  wife*  in  Babylon, 

*  ["  Vonseincr  frau."  Ila  Ncandcr.  (^an  sei- 
nrr  lie  a  misprint  for  einfr  ?  '  from  a  lady  in 
Uabylon."  The  passage  is  i,  iy  Bjifiu>.avi  owiKhTti, 
which  our  translation  renders,  '  '1  he  cliurch  that 


PROPAGATION    OF    CHRISTIANITY    IN   ARABIA. 


47 


and  our  Saviour,  whom  he  prayed  to  cure 
him  of  a  severe  sickness,  deserves  no 
credit,  nor  does  that  of  the  conversion  of 
this  Ai2:barus  by  Thaddeus,  one  of  the  se- 
venty disciples.  Eusebius  found  the  docu- 
ments, from  which  he  penned  this  nar- 
ration, in  the  archives  of  Edessa,  and 
suffered  himself  to  be  deceived  by  them.* 
The  letter  of  Christ  is  utterly  unworthy 
of  him,  and  bears  the  appearance  of  a 
cento  from  various  passages  of  the  Gos- 
pels. We  cannot  imagine  either  that  any 
thing  written  by  the  Saviour  himself  could 
have  remained  unknown  to  the  rest  of  the 
world  till  the  time  of  Eusebius.  Again, 
the  letter  of  Abgarus  is  not  composed  in 
the  style  of  an  Oriental  prince.  Whether 
the  story  be  in  some  degree  founded  in 
truth,  though  not  true  as  it  now  stands, 
we  have  no  means  of  determining;  one 
thing  is  certain,  that  Christianity  spread 
betimes  into  these  parts,  but  yet  the  first 
traces  of  it  in  a  prince  of  that  country 
occur  between  160-170,  in  Abgarus  Bar 
Manu.  The  Christian  sage,  Bardesanes, 
was  in  high  regard  with  him,  and  relates, 
that  he  forbad,  under  heavy  punishments, 
the  custom  of  castration  for  the  rites  of 
Cybele,  by  ordering  that  those  who  per- 
formed it  should  lose  their  hands.  It 
certainly  does  not  follow  from  this  that 
he  v\as  a  Christian,  but  we  may  remark 
besides,  that  on  his  coins  the  customary 
marks  of  the  worship  of' Baal  disappear, 
and  are  replaced  by  the  cross.f 

If  St.  PeterJ  preached  the  Gospel  in  the 


whether  it  be  the  then  capital  of  Seleucia,  Ctesi- 
phon,  or  more  probably  the  old  ruined  Babylon, 
leads  us  to  suppose  that  he  was  residing  in  that 
quarter. 

*  [The  observations  of  Lardner^  (vol.  iii.  p. 
R9i,  4to  ed.)  and  the  note  of  Valcsius  on  the  two 
last  chapters  of  Book  I.  of  Eusebius,  are  well  wor- 
thy of  attention.  Dr.  Jones  maintains  that  the 
whole  account  in  Eusebius  is  an  interpolation. 
Jones  on  the  Canon,  vol.  ii.  p.  1 — 26.     H.  J.  R. 

■j-  Bayer,  Historia  Edessena  e  numis  illustrata, 
1.  iii.  p.  173.  Bayer  is,  however,  wrong  in  plac- 
ing him  in  the  year  200.  [The  name  is  invari- 
ably Abgarus  on  coins.  For  this  information  I  am 
indebted  to  one,  whose  extensive  and  accurate 
knowledge  of  Greek  coins  is  only  equalled  by  his 
readiness  to  communicate  to  those  who  seek  for 
information  on  IS"umismatical  subjects,  the  results 
of  his  own  experience.  The  name  of  Mr.  Burgcn 
is  so  well  known  to  the  Numismatical  world,  as 
scarcely  to  require  mention  after  the  above  state- 
ment.—H.  J.  K. 

f  And  St.  Thomas  also,  according  to  the  tradi- 
tion of  Origen,  preserved  in  Euseb.  iii.  1. 

is  at  Babylon,  elected  together  with  you.'.  See, 
however,  Eusebius,  H.  E.  ii.  15,  where  he  ob- 
serves that  St.  Peter  calls  Home,  Babylon,  and 
quotes  this  passage.  Vid.  Vales,  in  ioc, — H.  J.  R] 


1  Parthian  empire,  some  seeds  ofChristianity 
j  may  perhaps,  in  very  early  days,  have 
reached  Persia,  which  then  belonged  to 
j  that  empire,  but  the  frequent  wars  be- 
j  tvveen  the  Romans  and  the  Parthians 
would  prevent  communication  between 
j  the  Christians  of  those  slates.  The  Bar- 
desanes of  Edessa,  mentioned  above,  who 
wrote  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor  Marcus 
Aurelius,  mentions*  the  spreading  of 
Christianity  in  Parthia,  Media,  Persia,  and 
Bactria.  After  the  restoration  of  the  in- 
dependence of  the  old  Persian  empire, 
under  the  Sassanidae,  the  Persian  Chris- 
tians are  better  known  to  us  in  conse- 
quence of  the  attempt  of  the  Persian 
Mani,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, to  form  a  son  of  miion  between  the 
religion  of  Zoroaster  and  that  of  Christ. 

In  Arabia,  the  Jews,  who  were  in  great 
numbers,  would  serve  as  a  starting-point 
for  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  We 
have  no  farther  account  of  the  activity  of 
tlie  Apostle  St.  Paul  in  diis  country,  im- 
mediately after  his  conversion,  than  what 
we  gather  from  ids  own  expression,  in 
his  Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  If  Indian 
and  Arabian  are  used  as  synonymous  terms 
in  an  old  tradition,  we  may  conclude  that 
St.  Bartholomew  preached  the  Gospel  in 
Arabia,  for  which  purpose  he  took  with 
him  a  Gospel  written  in  the  Hebrew 
(Aramaic)  language.  If  this  supposition 
is  correct,  Pantasnus,  the  learned  cntechist 
of  Alexandria,  was  the  pastor  of  a  part  of 
this  nation,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  second 
century.  In  the  early  part  of  the  third, 
Origen,  the  great  Alexandrian  pastor,  was 
exerting  himself  in  some  portion  of  Arabia. 
Eusebius  tells  us  (vi.  19)  "A  soldier  came 
and  brought  to  Demetrius,  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria, and  the  then  prefect  of  Egypt,  let- 
ters from  the  governor  of  Arabia,  (viyot/ixtvof 
T»j?  Agai^iai,)  requesting  that  Origen  might 
be  sent  as  soon  as  possible  to  a  conference 
with  him."  The  language  of  Eusebius  is 
not  such  as  to  lead  us  to  imagine  he  is 
here  speaking  of  the  chief  of  a  set  of 
nomadic  Arabians;  and  even  were  it  so, 
it  would  hardly  be  probable  that  such  a 
person  should  have  heard  of  the  wisdom 
of  a  Christian  teacher.  On  the  contrary, 
these  words  naturally  point  to  a  Roman 
governor  of  the  part  of  Arabiaf  then  sub- 
ject to  the  Roman  empire.  He  might  be- 
long to  the  class  of  inquiring  heathens, 
and  having  heard  of  the  wisdom  and  the 


*  Euseb   PriEpar.  Evang.  I.  vi.  c.  10. 
■\  In  later  times  we  find  a  "  dux  Arabia;"  in  the 
Notitia  Imperii. 


48 


CHRISTIANITY    IN    ARABIA    AND    EGYPT. 


knowledge  of  Origen,  to  which  the  hea-   must  conclude,  that  before  the  begi 


then  were  not  strangers,  may  have  turned 
his  attention  to  him  in  particular,  as  an 
enlightened  teacher.  It  may  well  be  ima- 
gined that  Origen  made  use  of  this  op- 
portunity to  obtain  the  governor's  favour 
for  the  (Gospel.  We  see  Origen  afterwards 
in  close  connection  with  the  Christian 
communities  in  Arabia,  but  the  further 
propogation  of  the  Gospel  there  in  later 
times  was  much  impeded  by  the  nomadic 
liabits  of  the  people,  and  the  influence  of 
the  Jews,  who  hated  Christianity. 

The  ancient  Syro-Persian  community 
of  Cliristians  deduces  its  origin,  we  know^, 
from   St.  Thomas  the  Apostle,  although 
the  first  definite  account  of  its  existence 
is  to  be  found  in  Cosmus  Indicoploistes, 
in  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century.    Some 
traces,    however,    of  such    a    report  are 
found  in  Gregory  Nazianzen,  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  fourth  century,  for  he  says, 
(Orat.  25)  that  St.  Thomas  preached  the 
Gospel  in  India,  but  India  was  then  a  very 
indefinite  term.     Jerome  (Ep.  148)  under- 
stands by  it  Ethiopia,  which  was  com- 
monly included  under  the  name  India,  as 
well  as  Arabia.     If  the  tradition,  which  is 
found  in  Origen,  that  St.  Thomas  was  the 
Apostle   of  the   Parthians,  be  worthy  of 
credit,  the  other  is,  perhaps,  also  credible, 
for  the  Parthian  empire  then  touched  the 
borders  of  India ;  but  these  are  only  vague 
reports.     Eusebius  (i.  10)  relates,  as  we 
remarked  above,  that  Pantaenus  undertook 
a  missionary  journey  to  the  people  who 
dwelt   eastward,   and    proceeded    in   the 
prosecution  of  it  as  far  as  India.     He  there 
found    the  seed    of  Christianity  already 
sown  by  St.  Bartholomew,  and  a  Hebrew 
Gospel    which     the    same    apostle    had 
brought  thither.    The  circumstance  of  the 
Hebrew  Gospel  is  no  proof  that  he  does 
not  mean  East  India  properly  so  called ; 
for  we  may  suppose,  that  the  Jews  who 
now   inhabit  the  coasts  of  Malabar  had 
already  settled  tliere.     The  words  of  Eu- 
sebius seem  to  indicate  that  he  himself 
thought  of  a  more  distant  country  than 
Arabia,  and  would  well  suit  the  notion  of 
East  India  proper.      In  order  to  decide 
which  he  most  probably  meant,  a  district 
of  Arabia  or  East  India  proper,  we  must 
hero   compare  some  accounts  of  a  later 
date,  namely,  of  the  fcmrth  century.     If 
then  tlie  Din,  from  which  the  missionary 
Theophilus  came,  in  the  time  of  the  Em- 
peror Constantine,  is  the  Din  at  the  en- 
trance of  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  if  in  the 


of  the  fourth  century  the  seed  of  the 
Gospel  had  been  sown  in  East  India,  for 
all  which  is  there  mentioned  attests  the 
foundation  of  the  Christian  Church  to 
have  been  laid  there  in  olden  times. 

We    proceed   now  to  Africa.     In  this 
quarter  of  the  globe,  Egypt  was  the  first 
portion  which  received  the  knowledge  of 
Christianity.     We  have  remarked  above, 
that  in  Alexandria  fewer  prejudices  than 
elsewiiere  opposed    (he  introduction  of 
Christianity ;  and  that,  in  fact,  in  many 
respects  the  turn  of  their  minds  there  was 
favourable  to  it.     There  appear  among  the 
earliest  zealous  preachers  of  Christianity, 
men  of  the  Alexandrian  school,  as  Apollo 
the  Alexandrian,  and,  probably,  also  Bar- 
nabas of  Cyprus.     The  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, the  Epistle  ascribed  to  Barnabas, 
and  the  Egyptian  Gospel,  {'EvctyyiXto>  xecr 
AiyvTfTtovi;,)    in   which   the    Alexandrian 
theosophic  taste  showed  itself,  the  Gnos- 
ticism of  the  first  half  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, are  proofs  of  the  influence  that  Chris- 
tianity exerted  over  the  Jewish  philosophy 
of  Alexandria.     According  to  an  old  tra- 
dition, the  Apostle  Mark  was  the  founder 
of  the  Alexandrian  Church.     Cyrene  was 
likely  to  receive  Christianity  with  great 
ease  from  Alexandria,  in  consequence  of 
their  constant  communication,  and  their 
kindred  spirit.     Its  progress  from  Lower 
Egypt,  a   place   filled    with  Jewish    and 
Grecian  colonies,  to  Middle,  and  especially 
to  Upper  Egypt,  whither  foreign  cultiva- 
tion had  less  penetrated,  was  Ukely  to  be 
impeded  by  unacquaintance  with  the  Greek 
language,  the  prevalence  of  the  Coptic, 
and  the  dominion  of  the  priests  and  the 
old  Egyptian  superstition.    A  persecution, 
however,  of  the  Christians  in  the  Thebais, 
under    the    Emperor    Septimus    Severus, 
(Euseb.  vi.  1)  shows  that  Cln-istianity  had 
spread  even  into  Upper  Egypt  in  the  lat- 
ter part  of  the  second  century.     In  the 
first  half  of  the  third,  this  province  pro- 
bably possessed  a  translation  of  the  New 
Testament  in    the   old   language  of  the 
country. 

There  are  no  distinct  and  authentic  ac- 
counts of  the  progress  of  Christianity  in 
yEthiopia  (Abyssinia,)  during  these  cen- 
turies. History  gives  us  no  information 
as  to  the  consequences  of  the  conversion 
of  the  courtier  of  Candace,  queen  of  Me- 
roe,  which  is  mentioned  in  the  Acts,  ch. 
viii. 

The  Gospel  soon  readied  Carthage,  and 


history  of  Philostorgius,  (cxi.  4,  Sec.)  by  ,  the   whole   of  Proconsular   Africa,  from 
India  is  meant  East  India  proper,  then  we  ^  their  intercourse  with  Rome.  This  Church 


GERMANY — SPAIN. 


49 


of  Carthage  is  first  known  to  us  from  the 
Presbyter  Tertullian,  in  the  latter  half  of 
the  second  centuijy,  but  it  was  then  evi- 
dently in  a  flourisluDg  condition.  The 
Christians  were  already  there  in  great 
numbers,  and  complaints  were  made  "■  that 
Christianity  was  spreading  both  in  town 
and  country  among  all  ranks,  and  even 
among  the  highest."*  Not  to  cite  passages, 
where  Tertullian  speaks  rhetorically,  he 
mentions  in  hisaddress  to  the  governor. 
Scapula,  (chap,  iv.)  a  persecution  of  the 
Christians  as  having  already  taken  place 
in  Mauretania.  Christianity,  after  the 
middle  of  the  third  century,  had  made 
such  progress  in  Mauretania  and  Numi- 
dia,  that  under  Cyprian,  the  bishop  of 
Carthage,  a  synod  of  eighty-seven  bishops 
was  held. 

If  we  pass  now  to  the  consideration  of 
Europe,  we  find  in  Rome  the  chief,  but 
not  the  only  station  for  the  propagation 
of  the  Gospel.  Flourishing  churches  at 
Lugdunum  (Lyons,)  and  Vienne,  become 
known  to  us  during  a  bloody  persecution 
in  the  year  177.  The  multitude  of  Chris- 
tians of  Asia  Minor,  as  well  as  the  pecu- 
liar connection  of  these  communities  with 
that  country,  lead  to  the  supposition,  that 
the  commerce  between  the  trading  town 
of  Lyons  and  Asia  Minor  gave  occasion  to 
the  introduction  of  Christianity  from  Asia 
Minor,  where  it  was  spread  so  widely 
from  tlie  first,  into  Gaul.  The  heathenism 
of  Gaul  withstood  a  long  time  the  exten- 
sion of  Christianity.  Even  towards  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  there  v/ere 
but  few  Christian  communities  in  Gaul. 
According  to  Gregory  of  Tours,  a  French 
historian,  seven  missionaries  had  then 
come  from  Rome  into  Gaul,  and  founded 
communities  in  seven  towns  •,  of  which 
they  became  the  bishops.  One  of  these 
was  Dionysius,  the  first  bishop  of  Paris, 
whom  later  legends  have  confused  with 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  who  was  con- 
verted at  Athens  by  St.  Paul.  Gregory  of 
Tours,  who  wrote  towards  the  end  of  the 
sixth  century,  when  so  many  fables  as  to 
the  origin  of  various  churches  were  in 
circulation,  is,  we  acknowledge,  no  very 
trustworthy  witness  •,  but  still  this  account 
may  have  some  truth  for  its  foundation. 
One  of  the  seven,  Saturninus,  the  founder 
of  the  Church  of  Toulouse,  is  known  to 


*  Tertullian,   ApoUoget.  i.     Obsessam  voceif- 
rantur  civitatem,  in  agnis,  in  castellis,  in  insulis 
Christianos,  omnem  sexum,  tDtatem,  conditionem 
et  jam  dignitatem  ad  hoc  nomen  transgredi. 
7 


us  by  a  far  older  document,  the  narration 
of  his  martyrdom. 

Irenaeus,  who  became  bishop  of  Lyons, 
after  the  above  mentioned  persecution  in 
177,  states  the  extension  of  the  Gospel 
into  Germany,  (adv.  Haeres.  lib.  i.  c.  10.) 
It  might  easily  reach  that  part  of  Germany 
subject  to  the  Romans,  the  German ia  Cis- 
rhenana,from  its  connection  with  the  pro- 
vince of  Gaul,  but  would  experience  more 
difficulty  in  penetrating  among  the  inde- 
pendent neighbouring  tribes  of  Germania 
Transrhenana.  But  the  same  Irenaeus 
says,  in  another  passage,  (iii.  ch.  4,)  " Many 
nations  of  barbarians,  without  paper  and 
ink,  have,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  the 
words  of  salvation  written  in  their  hearts."* 
Irenaeus  here  justly  recognises  in  the  ac- 
tivity of  Christianity  that  peculiar  and 
essential  character,  in  virtue  of  which  it 
can  reach  people  in  every  stage  of  civili- 
zation, and  through  its  living  power  im 
press  its  precepts  on  their  hearts.  But  it 
is  also  certain  that  Cliristianity  can  never 
long  maintain  its  own  peculiar  character, 
where  it  does  not  lay  deep  hold  of  the 
intellectual  and  moral  habits  of  a  people, 
and  where  it  does  not,  while  it  brings  its 
own  peculiar  character  with  it,  raise  up 
also  and  foster  the  seeds  of  all  human 
civilization. 

Irenaeus  is  also  the  first  to  speak  of  the 
propagation  of  Christianity  in  Spain  (In 
T«t{  'l^n^tat?.)  The  tradition  in  Euse- 
bius,  in  the  fourth  century,  that  the  Apostle 
St.  Paul  preached  the  Gospel  in  Spain,  is 
not  sufficient  evidence,  because  it  was  then 
too  much  the  fashion  to  establish  facts 
from  incompetent  presumptions,  conclu- 
sions, and  suppositions  ;  and  so,  perhaps, 
Rom.  XV.  24,  may  have  given  rise  to  this 
report.  But  since  the  Roman  Bishop 
Clemens  (Ep.  i.  v.  5,)  says  that  St.  Paul 
went  to  the  very  boundaries  of  the  West, 
{rt^fia.  T»)j  ^vaiu^^)  we  cannot  imagine  this 
expression  to  allude  to  Rome,  and  our 
thoughts  naturally  turn  to  Spain.  Clement 
was  probably  himself  the  disciple  of  St. 
Paul,  and  this  is  a  matter  on  which  we 
can  hardly  suppose  him  to  have  been  de- 
ceived. Most  certainly,  however,  we  find 
no  place  for  any  journey  of  St.  Paul's 
into  Spain,  unless  we  suppose  that  he  was 
freed  from  the  imprisonment  related  in  the 
Acts,  and  after  his  deliverance  fulfilled  the 
intention  which  he  announces  in  the  above 
passage.     Now  the  Second  Epistle  of  St. 


*  Sine  charta  et  atramento  scriptam  habentes 
per  Spiritum  in  cordibus  suis  salutem. 


50 


ROMAN  POLITICAL  FEELINGS. 


Paul  to  Timothy  would  actually  compel 
us  to  suppose  such  a  deliverance,  and 
a  second  imprisonment,  unless  we  take 
refuge  in  some  very  forced  interpretation. 

Tertullian  (adv.  Jud.  c.  7,)  speaks  of 
the  spreading  of  Christianity  into  Britain, 
but  the  passage  is  entirely  rhetorical  in 
its  whole  cast ;  and  the  statement  that  it 
had  penetpated  parts  of  Britain  not  sub- 
jected to  the  Roman  dominion,  may  per- 
haps be  exaggerated.  Bede,  in  the  eighth 
century,  informs  us,  that  Lucius,  a  British 
king,  had  requested  Eleutlieros,  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second 
century,  to  send  missionaries  to  him.  But 
the  peculiarities  of  the  later  Church  in 
Britain  are  an  argument  against  its  deriving 
its  origin  from  Rome;  for  that  Church 
departed  from  the  Romish  in  many  ritual 
points ;  it  agreed  far  more  with  the 
Churches  of  Asia  Minor;  and  it  with- 
stood for  a  long  time  the  authority  of  the 
Romish  Church.  This  appears  to  prove 
that  the  British  received,  either  imme- 
diately or  by  means  of  Gau],  their  Chris- 
tianity from  Asia  Minor,  which  may  have 
easily  taken  place  through  their  commer- 
cial intercourse.*  The  later  Anglo-Saxons, 
who  opposed  the  spirit  of  Church  inde- 
pendence, and  wished  to  establish  the 
supremacy  of  Rome,  were  inclined  gene- 
rally to  trace  back  their  Church  establish- 
ments to  a  Roman  origin,  and  from  this 
attempt,  the  above  story,  as  well  as  many 
other  false  reports,  may  have  arisen. 

We  proceed  now  to  the  persecutions  of 
the  Christian  Church  in  the  Roman  em- 
pire. 

II.  Opposition  to  Christianity. — Introduc- 
tion— its  first  causes. 

In  order  justly  to  appreciate  the  nature 
of  these  persecutions,  it  is  of  great  impor- 
tance to  weigh  accurately  their  causes.  It 
has  often  been  remarked  as  singular,  that 
while  the  Romans  were  usually  tolerant 
in  matters  of  religion,  they  should  have 
shown  such  impatience,  and  such  a  love 
of  persecution  towards  the  Christians;  but 
every  statement  of  Roman  tolerance  re- 
quires much  limitation.  The  ideas  of 
general  rights  of  man,  of  a  general  free- 
dom in  matters  of  religion  and  conscience, 
were  altogetlier  foreign  to  the  notions  of 
antiquity  ;  they  were  first  brought  to  light 
by  the  Gospel,  when  it  set  forth  not  a 
national  God,  but  a  God  of  all  human 
nature,  when  it  taught  us  to  recognise  man 

[Sec,  however,  Bishop  Lloyd  on  Church  Go- 
vemment,  p.  48.    H.  J.  K.J  J 


as  man,  to  look  on  all  men  as  the  image 
of  God,  with  the  same  destination,  the 
same  duties, and  the  same  rights;  when  it 
considered  man,  not  as  the  member  of 
one  narrow  political  circle,  but  as  called  to 
citizenship  in  God's  boundless  kingdom  ; 
and  when,  freeing  religion  from  all  essen- 
tial dependence  on  external  and  earthly 
things,  it  placed  its  whole  essence  in  the 
worship  of  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 
The  men  of  antiquity  we're  unable  to  dis- 
tinguish the  man  from  the  citizen,  so  as  to 
attain  to  a  recognition  of  general  rights  of 
man  and  rights  of  conscience.  Religion 
was  a  state  matter;  there  were  only  na- 
tional and  state  religions,  and  the  laws 
which  related  to  religion  being  a  part  of 
the  general  civil  code,  any  violation  of 
them  was  considered  as  a  violation  of  the 
latter.*  This  was  a  view  which  espe- 
cially suited  the  Romans,  whose  ruling 
passions  and  feelings  were  political.  Ci- 
cero, de  Leg.  ii.  8,  lays  it  down  as  a  prin- 
ciple of  legislation  entirely  conformable  to 
the  rights  of  the  Roman  state,  that  •'  no 
man  shall  have  separate  gods  for  himself, 
and  no  man  shall  worship  by  himself  new 
or  foreign  gods,  unless  they  have  been 
publicly  acknowledged  by  the  laws  of  the 
state  :"  (nisi  publice  adscitos.)  Now  al- 
though under  the  emperors  the  old  laws 
became  less  strictly  observed,  and  foreign 
customs  every  day  gained  more  admission 
into  Rome,  there  yet  arose  many  new 
causes  for  anxiety  with  regard  to  the  in- 
troduction of  new  religions.  In  those 
times  there  was  the  greatest  dread  of 
every  thing  to  which  a  political  end  might 
be  attached,  and  the  jealous  character  of 
despotism  icas  apt  to  fear  poIiJical  aims, 
even  where  there  was  nothing  of  the  kind. 
Religion, and  religious  societies,  it  seemed, 
might  easily  become  the  pretence  for  poli- 
tical societies  and  conspiracies.  From 
this  feeling  arose  the  well-known  speech 
of  Maecenas  to  Augustus,  in  Dio  Cassius, 
who  has  here  at  least,  whether  the  speech 
be  genuine  or  not,  expressed  the  prevail- 


*  As  Varro  had  already  classed  theology  under 
three  divisions — "  theologia  philosophica  et  vera," 
"  theologia  poctica  et  mythica,"  and  "  theologia 
civilis;"  so  Dio  Chrysostom,  in  the  first  half  of 
the  second  century,  Orat.  12,  distinguishes  three 
sources  of  religion ;  the  general  religious  sense  in 
all  mankind,  the  j^(fi/Tcc  aTrce^iy  i  yb^ctTrcK  ivty.ta,  21  ; 
poetry  and  customs,  which  easily  extend  them- 
selves, 31  ;  and  laws  which  constrain,  threaten, 
and  ])unish,  to  vi/xt6eT,»cv,  to  iv^jxa/ci',  to  /urr:i 
^u/utuc  KctiTTg^cTTn^iU'v,  although  hcjusllv  establishes 
only  the  first  as  the  general  and  original  source 
from  which  all  the  rest  proceed.  Christianity  can 
allow  none  of  these,  but  ihe  first,  to  be  of  avail. 


ROMAN   TREATMENT    OP    FOREIGN    RITES, 


51 


ing  sentiment  of  those  times.  "  Honour 
the  gods,"  says  Maecenas,  "  by  all  means, 
according  to  ihe  customs  of  your  coun- 
try, and  force,  others  so  to  honour  them. 
But  those  who  are  forever  introducing 
something  foreign  in  these  matters,  hate 
and  punisli,  not  only  for  the  sake  of  the 
gods,  because  they  who  despise  them  will 
hardly  reverence  any  thing  besides,  but 
also  because  they  who  introduce  new 
divinities,  mislead  many  others  into  re- 
ceiving foreign  laws  also.  Thence  arise 
conspiracies  and  secret  meetings,  which 
are  of  infinite  disservice  to  the  monarchy. 
Siifier  no  man,  either*  to  deny  the  gods, 
or  to  practise  sorcery."  The  Roman 
jurist,  Julius  Pauhis,  states  the  following 
as  one  of  the  leading  principles  of  Roman 
law.  (B.  v.  tit.  21.)  "  Those  who  in- 
troduced new  religions,  or  such  as  were 
unknown  in  their  tendency  and  nature, 
by  which  the  minds  of  men  might  be  agi- 
t;ited,j  were  degraded,  if  they  belonged  to 
the  higher  ranks,  and  if  they  were  in  a 
lower  state,  were  punished  with  death." 
We  see  easily  how  Christianity,  which 
produced  so  great,  and  to  a  Roman  states- 
man, so  incomprehensible  an  agitation  in 
the  consciences  of  men,  would  fall  among 
the  class  of  "  Religiones  nova?."  Here 
also  appear  the  two  points  of  view  in 
which  Christianity  might  interfere  with 
the  laws  of  the  state. 

1.  It  seduced  many  Roman  citizens 
from  the  religion  of  the  state,  to  the  oh- 
sprvanc  of  ivhich  they  were  bound  by  the 
laios,  and  also  from  the  observance  of  the 
^'■Ccerimonice  Romance.''''  Manv  gover- 
nors, therefore,  not  personally  prejudiced 
against  Christianity,  proposed  a  sort  of 
compromise  to  the  Christians  who  were 
brought  before  them.  "  They  need  onlv 
outwardly  do  what  the  law  required,  and 
observe  the  religions  ceremonies  pre- 
scribed by  the  state;  the  law  was  only 
concerned  with  outward  conduct;  and 
they  were  welcome  to  believe  and  to 
honour  what  they  pleased  in  their  hearts." 
Or  else  thus  :  "  they  were  free  constantly 
to  honour  their  own  God,  provided  they 
joined  with  his  worship  that  of  '.he  Roman 
Gods." 

2.  Il  introduced  a  new  religion,  which 
was  not  recognised  by  the  laws  of  the  state 
among  Ihe  '•'•Religiones  lici.tce.''''  Thence 
came,  according  to  Tertullian,  the  nsnal 
reproach  of  the  heathens  against  Chris- 
tianity— "  Non  licet  esse  vos ;"  and  Cal- 


*  'aSsoi  e.V=u  the  common  tcrrp  for  a  Christian. 
•j-  De  quibus  animi  hominum  moverentur. 


sus  accuses  the  Christians  of  secret  meet- 
ings, by  which  they  contravened  the 
prevailing  laws  with  regard    to  religion 

(a-vnQriy.oci      V(Z^x      Ta      ►£i'0/t*»<rjHii'a.)        Thc 

Romans  had,  no  doubt,  a  certain  kind  of 
religious  toleration  ;  but  it  was  one  which, 
being  closely  connected  with  the  poly- 
theistic system  of  philosophy  and  religion, 
was  not  likely  to  be  exercised  towards 
Christianity.  When  they  secured  to  a 
conquered  people  the  free  observance  of 
their  old  religion,  they  expected  by  that 
means  to  win  the  people  to  their  interests, 
and  also  to  make  friends  of  their  gods. 
The  Romans,  who  were  religiously  dis- 
posed, attributed  their  universal  sove- 
reignty to  this  system  of  making  friends 
of  the  gods  of  all  nations,  as  we  may- 
learn  from  the  language  of  the  heathen  in 
Minucius  Felix,  and  from  Aristides  (En- 
com.  RomfE.)  Even  beyond  the  limits 
of  their  own  kingdom,  the  free  exercise 
of  their  religion  was  permitted  to  all 
nations ;  and  therefore  Rome,  to  which 
men  flocked  from  all  quarters  of  the 
globe,  became  the  seat  of  religions  of 
every  sort.  See  Aristid.  loc.  cit.  and 
Dionysius  Halicarn.  (Archasolog.  ii.  19;) 
the  latter  of  whom  says,  "  Men  of  a 
thousand  nations  come  to  our  city,  and 
there  they  must  worship  the  gods  of  their 
country  according  to  their  own  customs." 
It  even  happened  that  much  from  these 
foreign  systems  of  worship  was  incorpo- 
rated, with  some  modification,  into  the 
state  religion  of  Rome  :  but  then  a  distinct 
senatns-consultum  was  requisite,  before 
the  Roman  citizen  could  be  permitted  to 
join  in  the  celebration  of  this  foreign 
worship.  At  this  time,  when  the  autho- 
rity of  the  old  national  religion,  from  the 
longing  after  something  new,  was  fast 
dying  away,  and  strangers  came  con- 
stantly to  Jiome  from  all  quarters,  it  was 
often  the  case,  that  even  Romans  them- 
selves would  make  use  of  the  ceremonies 
of  foreign  religions,  which  were  not  yet 
among  the  "  Religiones  publice  adscita) ;" 
but  then  this  was  an  irregularity  which 
old-fashioned  Romans  attributed  to  the 
corruptions  of  the  times,  and  to  the  ne- 
glect of  old  customs.  Much,  which  w;is 
reckoned  among  those  corruptio'ns,  was 
passed  over,  as  well  as  this,  without  ani- 
madversion. Tiie  change  was  also  the 
less  remarkable,  because  those  who  had 
adopted  the  foreign  customs,  observed  at 
the  same  time  the  "Cajrimonia;  Romanaj." 
And  yet  certainly  at  times,  when  mailers 
ran  too  high,  or  when  some  extraordinary- 
zeal  for  old  habits  and  the  old  civil  virtues 


52 

v.-as  awakened,  laws  were  enacted  "ad 
coercendos  profanos  ritus." 

The  free  and  undisturbed  exercise  of 
their  religion  was  secured  also  to  the  Jews, 
by  senatus-consulta  and  imperial  edicts ; 
and  the  Romans  could  recognise,  in  the 
God  of  the  Jews,  a  national  God,  deserv- 
ing of  veneration — although,  at  the  same 
time,  they  complained  of  the  narrow- 
mindedness  and  intolerance  of  the  Jews, 
who  would  honour  no  God  but  their  own, 
and  forbade,  with  bitter  enmity,  the  wor- 
ship of  any  other.  Judaism  was  a  "  re- 
Jigio  licita;"  and  it  was,  therefore,  made 
a  matter  of  reproach  to  the  Christians, 
that  they  had  endeavoured  at  first,  by 
coming  forward  as  a  Jewish  sect,  to  creep 
in  under  the  cover  of  an  openly-tolerated 
religion.*  But  it  was  by  no  means  per- 
mitted to  the  Jews  to  extend  their  religion 
among  the  Roman  heathens;  and  the  lat- 
ter were  forbidden,  under  heavy  penalties, 
to  undergo  circumcision.  But  even  then 
it  happened,  that  from  the  above  men- 
tioned causes,  the  number  of  proselytes 
among  the  heathen  increased  exceedingly. 
This  the  government  sometimes  disre- 
garded, but  at  other  limes,  on  the  contrary, 
severe  laws  were  enacted  to  repress  it,  as 
those  of  the  senate  under  Tiberius,  (Tac. 
Ann.  ii.  85.)  those  of  Antoninus  Pius,  and 
Septimus  Severus. 

The  case  was  wholly  different  with 
Christianity.  Here  was  no  old  religion 
of  a  country  and  people,  as  in  all  the 
other  cases,  but  Christianity  appeared 
rather  as  a  falling  away  from  a  "religio 
licita" — a  revolfj"  against  an  ancient  na- 
tional religion.  So  Celsus,  in  accordance 
with  the  then  prevailing  sentiments,  thus 
reproaches  the  Christians,  B.  \.  254,  (p. 
247,  ed.  Spencer,)  and  tells  them  that  they 
are  neither  Heathens  nor  Jews :  "  while  the 
Jews  are,  at  any  rate,  a  peculiar  people, 
and  observe  a  national  worship,  be  that 
worship  what  it  may:  and  in  this  they 
act  like  other  men.  Justly,"  says  he, 
"  are  the  old  laws  observed  among  all  na- 
tions ;  and  it  is  a  crime  to  desert  them." 
Hence  arose  the  common  reproach  against 
Christians,  and  their  usual  appellation, 
"  the  new  race,"  which  is  neither  the  one 
thing  nor  the  other,  "  genus  tertium." 
The  notion  of  a  religion  which  should 
unite  all  men  with  one  another,  appeared 
to  the  ancients  an  impossibility.  "  A  man 
must   be  very  weak,"  says  Celsus,  "  to 


CHRISTIANITY    AWAKENS    JEALOUSY. 


.    *   Sub  umbraculo  religionis  licitsB. 

■\  It  proceciled  from  a  wish  of  (TTum^w  TTfv  ' 
lutvov  rm  'lovJoLutv-     Celsus  iii.  117. 


imagine  that  Greeks  and  Barbarians,  in 
Asia,  Europe,  and  Libya,  can  ever  unite 
under  the  same  system  of  religion."  B. 
viii.  p.  438.  (p.  425,  ed.  Spencer.)  They 
now  saw  how  Christianity  was  extending 
itself  irresistibly  among  all  ranks,  and 
threatened  to  overturn  the  slate  religion, 
and  with  it  the  frame  of  civil  society, 
which  seemed  bound  up  in  that  religion. 
They,  therefore,  thought  it  reqiiisite  to 
oppose  inward  power  by  outward  violence. 
It  was  still  further  an  excitement  to  jea- 
lousy, that  the  Christians  had  none  of 
those  things,  which  men  are  accustomed 
to  look  for  in  religion  ;  nothing  that  was 
calculated  to  strike  the  eye,  as  there  was 
in  Judaism,  the  temple  and  the  sacrifices 
of  which  were  revered  even  by  the  hea- 
then. Celsus  says  against  the  Christians, 
B.  viii.  p.  400,  (p.  389,  ed.  Spencer,)  that 
"  their  having  neither  altars,  images,  nor 
temple,  was  the  token  of  an  invisible,  se- 
cret order."  And  again,  the  internal  feel- 
ings of  brotherly  union,  by  which  every 
Christian  in  every  city  alike  found  friends, 
who  were  more  to  him  than  all  the  plea- 
sures of  the  world,  were  beyond  the  com- 
prehension of  the  heathen.  "  What  is 
this  ?"  they  would  say  •,  "  how  can  the 
Christians,  recognising  one  another  by 
some  secret  token,  love  each  other  even 
before  they  can  be  mutually  known  ?" 
(See  the  heathen  in  Minucius  Felix.)  The 
Roman  politicians  were  unable  to  under- 
stand the  bond  of  feeling  which  united 
Christians  so  strongly,  and  they  looked 
for  political  aims,  for  which,  in  those  days, 
the  jealousy  of  despotism  was  forever  on 
the  watch.  It  must,  in  those  days  of 
slavery,  have  given  a  bad  impression  of 
Christianity,  that  it  gave  to  men  some- 
thing which  elevated  them  above  all  fear  of 
man,  and  enabled  them  to  despise  all  hu- 
man power,  when  that  power  required 
any  thing  from  them  which  was  contrary 
to  their  conscience  and  faith.  Roman 
statesmen  had  no  respect  for  the  rights  of 
conscience.  When  the  Christian  could 
not  be  induced,  by  any  persuasion,  any 
fear,  or  any  violence,  to  participate  in  the 
"Cajrimoniae  Romana;"  enjoined  by  law, 
they  laid  it  all  to  a  blind  obstinacy  which 
required  punishment  (inflexibilis  obstina- 
tio.)  The  refusal,  however,  to  sacrifice  to 
the  gods,  was  with  many  a  less  crime  than 
their  declining,  while  they  showed  most 
conscientious  obedience  to  the  govern- 
ment in  every  thing  which  was  not  against 
the  law  of  God,  to  pay  any  of  those 
species  of  veneration  to  tlie  emperors, 
which  heathen  adulation  had  invented  in 


CHRISTIANS    REFUSE    DIVINE    HONOURS. 


building  temples  to  them,  oflering  incense 
to  their  busts,  and  numbering  them  among 
the  gods.  The  Christian  was  sure  to  give 
the  highest  ofTence,  when  he  explained 
that  he  had  one  Lord  in  heaven  that  he 
could  not  recognise  the  emperor  as  his 
Lord  in  the  same  sense  as  he  did  God 
Almighty ;  and  when  he  would  neither 
offer  idolatrous  worship  of  any  kind  to 
the  busts  of  the  emperors,  nor  swear  by 
their  genius.  What  a  contrast  is  there 
between  the  free  and  lofty  spirit  of  the 
Christian,  whose  conversation  was  in 
heaven,  and  the  slavish  feelings  of  the 
boastful,  would-be  philosopher,  Celsus ! 
when  he  says  to  the  Christians  :*  "  When 
they  ask  you  to  swear  by  the  Ruler  of 
Men,  this  is  no  severe  demand,  for  to  him 
is  the  earth  given,  and  whatever  you  re- 
ceive in  this  life,  you  receive  from  him !" 
On  the  anniversary  of  the  emperor's  ac- 
cession, or  on  some  rejoicing  for  a  vic- 
tory, when  every  place  wore  a  festal  ap- 
pearance, the  Christians  slirunk  back  into 
their  deep  seriousness,  which  appeared  to 
the  heatiien,  compared  with  their  own 
habits  of  carelessness  and  sensual  enjoy- 
ment of  the  moment,  a  misanthropic  hatred 
of  the  world  (odium  generis  humani ;) 
they  would  take  no  part  in  wild  and  un- 
reasonable pleasures,  or  at  least  pleasures 
which  suited  not  serious  habits  of  thought. 
Slany  a  Christian,  from  his  own  feelings, 
would  have  abhorred  giving  such  signs  of 
participation  as  they  might  and  ought  to 
have  done  according  to  the  principles  of 
their  religion  ;  but  the  zeal  for  God's  law 
was  always  entitled  to  respect,  which  in- 
duced men  to  do  too  much,  rather  than 
too  little,  and  which  tempted  them  to  draw 
down  upon  their  heads  persecution  at  the 
hands  of  man,  rather  than  to  hazard  for  an 
instant  doing  any  thing  against  the  law  of 
God.  Many  were  too  scrupulous  to  deck 
their  houses  with  laurel,  or  illuminate 
them,  from  imagining  in  their  mistaken 
notions  that  there  would  be  something 
heathenish  in  these  compliances.  The 
error  of  some  was  easily  charged  as  a  crime 
on  all.  Hence  in  those  times  came  the 
dangerous  "crimen  majestatis"  (accusa- 
tion of  high  treason)  against  the  Chris- 
tians. They  were  called  "  irreligiosi  in 
Caesares,  hostes  C?esarum,  hostes  populi 
Romani."  Many  Christians,  who  thought 
themselves  bound  to  military  duties  (for 
all  did  not  consider  a  soldier's  life  incom- 
patible with  Christianity,)  yet  refused  to 
take  the  military  oath.     The  fault  of  in- 


Lib,  viii.  p.  435.  (p.  422,  ed.  Spencer.) 


53 


dividuals  was  again  laid  to  the  charge  of 
the  whole  body.  "  Does  not  the  empe- 
ror justly  punish  you  ?"  says  Celsus ;  "  for 
if  all  did  as  you  do,  the  emperor  would  be 
left  to  himself,  no  one  would  defend  him, 
the  wildest  barbarians  would  obtain  the 
power  over  all  the  world,  and  tliere  would 
not  remain  a  single  trace  of  true  wisdom, 
nor  even  of  your  religion,  among  man- 
kind ;  for  fancy  not  that  your  Almighty 
God  would  come  down  from  heaven  to 
fight  for  us."*  It  was  the  fashion  to  at- 
tack the  Christians  by  accusations  that 
contradicted  one  another.  While,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  intimate  connection  between 
the  Christians  gave  rise  to  a  charge  of  po- 
litical conspiracies  ;  on  the  other,  they  are 
accused  of  not  paying  sufiicient  attention 
to  civil  matters,  and  the  afiairs  of  the  state  ; 
they  are  represented  as  men  who  are  dead 
to  the  world,  and  useless  in  business  (ho- 
mines infructuosi  in  negotio.)  It  used  then 
to  be  said  of  the  Christians  that  they  were 
dumb  in  public,  and  praters  in  private  (in 
publico  muti,  in  angulis  garruli,)  and 
"  what  would  become  of  the  business  of 
the  world  if  all  men  were  like  them  r" 

Such  were  the  causes  which  impelled 
the  Roman  governors  to  persecute  Chris- 
tianity, but  all  the  persecutions  did  not 
proceed  from  the  government.  The 
Christians  imre  often  the  victims  of  -po- 
pular fury.  The  common  people  looked 
upon  them  as  enemies  of  their  gods,  and 
that  w^as  equivalent  to  Atheism.  "  The 
Atheists,"  was  the  appellation  of  the 
Christians  in  every  body's  mouth,  and  of 
Atheists  the  vilest  and  most  incredible 
things  would  be  believed.  The  same  re- 
ports, which  at  different  times  have  been 
spread  about  those  sects  of  Christians, 
which  were  an  object  of  hatred  and  hor- 
ror to  the  fanaticism  of  the  multiuide, 
were  also  prevalent  among  the  heathen 
about  tlie  Christians  generally,  "  that  they 
committed  unnatural  crimes  in  their  as- 
semblies, and  were  in  tlie  habit  of  slaught- 
ering and  eating  children."  The  evidence 
of  abject  slaves,  or  of  persons  from  whom 
they  elicited  by  torment  whatever  avowal 
they  wanted,  were  then  used  to  support 
these  abominable  accusations,  and  to  jus- 
tify the  fury  of  the  multitude.  When  a 
drought  occurred  in  hot  districts,  from 
the  want  of  rain,  it  was  a  proverb  in  the 
north  of  Africa,  according  to  St.  Augus- 
tin,  that  "  if  it  does  not  rain,  blame  the 
Christians  for  it,"  (non  phut  Deus,  due 
ad  Christianos ;)  if  in  Egypt  the  Nile  did 


Lib.  viii.  p.  436.  (p.  423,  ed.  Spencer.) 


54 


THE    BILL    RELATIVE    TO    THE    CHRISTIANS. 


not  irrigate  the  fields,  if  in  Rome  the  Ti- 
ber overflowed,  if  an  earthquake,  a  fa- 
mine, or  any  other  public  calamity  took 
'place,  the  rage  of  the  people  was  in  an 
instant  excited  against  the  Christians. 
We  have  to  ascribe  all  this,  they  would 
say,  to  the  anger  of  the  gods  on  account 
of  the  increase  of  Christianity.  And  -can 
we  wonder  at  this,  when  Porphyry,  a 
man  who  wished  to  be  accounted  a  phi- 
losopher, found  a  cause  for  the  inveteracy 
of  an  infectious  and  desolating  sickness 
in  this,  that  Esculapius  could  no  longer 
exert  any  eflectual  influence  on  the  earth 
in  consequence  of  the  prevalence  of  Chris- 
tianity ? 

There  were  also  individual  interests  at 
■work,  which  were  anxious  to  excite  the 
rage  of  the  populace  against  Christianity  ; 
priests,  artificers,  and  others,  who  de- 
rived profit  from  the  service  of  idolatry, 
like  Demetrius  in  the  Acts ;  magicians, 
who  saw  their  trickery  laid  open  by 
Christians,  and  sanctified  cynics,  whose 
hypocrisy  the  Christians  exposed.  When 
the  magician,  Alexander  of  Abonoteichos, 
in  Pontus,  whose  life  Lucian  wrote,  ob- 
served that  his  arts  of  deception  no  longer 
obtained  any  credit  in  the  cities,  he  ex- 
claimed that  Pontus  was  full  of  Atheists 
and  Christians,  and  urged  the  people  to 
stone  them,  unless  they  wished  to  bring 
upon  themselves  the  anger  of  the  gods. 
He  never  began  his  enchantments  before 
the  people,  without  previously  crying  out, 
"  If  any  Atheist,  CJiristian,  or  Epicurean, 
has  sneaked  in  here  as  a  spy,  let  him  de- 
part!" To  appeal  to  the  might  of  the 
multitude  appears  not  to  have  been  un- 
usual with  the  defenders  of  heathenism, 
when  they  were  hard  pushed.  See  Ti- 
mocles,  in  Lucian's  Jupiter  Tragoed.  Jus- 
tin Martyr  knew  that  Crescens,  one  of 
the  common  pseudo-cynics  of  those  days, 
who  were  demagogues  under  the  veil  of 
sanctity,  had  excited  the  people's  fury 
against  the  Christians,  and  threatened 
death  to  himseif,  simply  because  he  had 
exposed  the  hypocrisy  of  Crescens. 

From  these  observations  on  the  causes 
of  the  persecutions,  it  follows  as  a  matter 
of  course,  tliat  iill  Chrisl'umity  was  re- 
ceived into  the  class  of  ''  religlones  llcl- 
Zce,"  hi)  defmiie  enactments^  the  Christians 
could  enjoy  no  general  and  secure  tran- 
quillUy  in  the  exercise  of  their  religion  in 
the  Roman  empire^  and  they  were  con- 
tinually the  victims  of  popular  fury  and 
individual  malice. 

We  proceed  now  to  detail  the  varying 
circumstances  of  the  Christian  Church, 


under  the  various  governments  of  empe- 
rors, who  were  so  differently  disposed  to- 
wards it. 

[A]  Persecution  of  Christianity  by  the  hand 
of  poiver —  Condition  of  the  Christian 
Church  under  the  various  emperors. 

Tertullian  (Apol.  ch.  v.  and  xxi.)  re- 
lates of  Tiberius,  that  having  heard  of  the 
miracles  and  resurrection  of  Christ  from 
the  report  of  Pilate,  he  proposed  a  bill  to 
the  senate,  "  that  Christ  should  be  re- 
ceived among  the  Roman  gods ;"  but  the 
senate  rejected  this  bill,  that  they  might 
not  renounce  their  old  right  of  determin- 
ing about  "religiones  novse"  only  of  their 
own  accord  (e  motu  proprio.)  The  em- 
peror did  not,  however,  wholly  renounce 
his  undertaking,  and  at  last  threatened 
severe  punishment  against  any  who  should 
accuse  Christians  merely  as  Christians. 
A  man  of  so  uncritical  a  judgment  as. 
Tertullian  cannot  be  valid  evidence  for  a 
tale,  Avhich  bears  every  mark  of  falsehood 
about  it.  If  we  conceive  that  this  is  some 
real  fact,  which  has  been  exaggerated,  and 
believe  a  part  of  it,  yet  the  little  we  can 
give  credit  to,  even  allowing  that  the  em- 
peror did  propose  some  such  bill,  cannot 
prove  that  toleration  was  granted  to  Chris- 
tianity. If  we  could  believe  that  Pilate, 
on  whom,  from  the  frivolity  of  his  senti- 
ments, the  miraculous  events  he  had  be- 
held can  hardly  have  made  more  than  a 
transient  impression^  did  actually  send  a 
report  of  this  nature,  yet  we  are  even 
then  far  from  having  any  reason  to  con- 
clude that  a  similar  impression  could  have 
been  made  on  the  heart  of  Tiberius.  At 
all  events,  it  suits  ill  with  the  slavish  cha- 
racter of  the  senate  under  Tiberius,  to 
imagine  that  it  ventured  to  act  in  this 
way;  and  this  could  hardly  have  given 
rise  to  such  a  law  against  the  accusers  of 
Christians,  because  at  that  time  the  Chris- 
tian sect  had  scarcely  obtained  any  name 
or  respect.  The  sequel  of  the  history  is 
a  clear  proof  that  no  such  law  was  en- 
acted in  the  time  of  Tiberius.  The  fact 
seems  to  be,  that  Tertullian  has  been  im- 
posed on  by  a  spurious  document,  fabri- 
cated perhaps  in  very  early  times  by  some 
of  tliose  Christians  who  hold  a  "  fraus 
pia"  to  be  no  sin.* 

At   first.  Christians   were    confounded 


*  [Lardner  (Heathen  Testimonies,  ch.  ii.) 
thinks  that  the  story  is  in  part  founded  on  fact. 
His  elaborate  discussion  of  the  subject  is  well 
worth  reading.  It  is  treated  in  a  very  different 
si)irit  by  Gibbon,  ch.  xvi.  p  666.— H.  J.  R.] 


NERO'S    PERSECUTION.       A.  D. 


64. 


.55 


with  Jews,  and,  therefore,  the  edict  for 
tlie  banishment  of  the  restless  Jews  from 
]{ome,  in  the  time  of  Claudius,  A.  D.  53, 
was  executed  on  the  Christians  also,  if 
there  were  any  there,  which  may  be  justly 
supposed.  Suetonius*  says  the  emperor 
Claudius  expelled  the  Jews  from  Rome, 
who  were  constantly  raising  disturbances, 
at  the  instigation  of  Clireslus.  It  might, 
iiulecd,  be  supposed,  that  some  turbulent 
person  of  this  name  then  living  is  here 
intended.  But  as  none  so  generally  known, 
as  the  expression  of  Suetonius  would  im- 
port, is  to  be  found,  and  the  name  X^ laroj 
was  often  pronounced  X^>)<7to?  by  the  hea- 
then, it  is  highly  probable  that  Suetonius, 
putting  together  what  he  had  heard  of  the 
Jewisli  expectation  of  a  Messiah,  and  the 
mere  dark  and  confused  accounts  which 
mav  have  reached  him  of  Christ's  works, 
has  expressed  himself  in  this  indefinite 
manner. 

The  first  persecution  took  place  under 
Nero,  A.  D.  64.  Nero  wished  to  remove 
from  himself  the  suspicion  that  he  was 
the  author  of  the  well-known  fire  at 
Home,  and  by  casting  the  imputation  on 
the  Christians,  to  give  a  satisfaction  to 
the  fanatical  and  blood-thirsty  populace, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  gratified  his 
own  diabolical  cruelty.  That  Nero  ever 
thought  of  laying  the  guilt  on  Christians, 
is  a  proof  that  they  were  even  then  an 
object  of  especial  hatred  to  the  people, 
and  that  such  an  accusation  would  then 
meet  with  a  ready  belief,  in  consequence 
of  the  common  reports  about  the  assem- 
blies of  the  Christians.  Tacitus  was  pro- 
]»al)ly  induced  by  these  same  reports  to 
say  of  the  Christians,  "  quos  per  flagita 
invisos  vulgus  Christianos  appellabat." 
He  condemns  also  the  new  sect,  which 
was  spreading  abroad  an  im-Roman  reli- 
gion (superstitio,)  and  probably  without 
any  examination,  just  as  in  later  times 
many  Romans  of  otherwise  good  under- 
standing did,  when  they  followed  vague 
reports  in  their  judgment  on  sects  which 
dilfered  from  the  prevailing  religion.  He 
could  see  in  Christianity  nothing  but  a 
detestable  superstition,  "  exitiabilis  super- 
stitio !" 

The  Christians  who  were  now  arrested, 
were  executed  in  the  most  cruel  manner, 
by  the  command  of  the  emperor ;  inclosed 
in  the  skins  of  wild  animals,  they  were 
thrown  to  dogs,  to  be  torn  to  pieces ;  or 
perhaps  their  clothes  smeared  with  com- 

*  Impulsore  Chresto  assidue  tumultuantes  Roma 
expulit. 


bustible  materials  (the  "-  tunica  molesta") 
they  were  set  on  fire,  to  give  at  night  the 
effect  of  an  illumination.  This  persecu- 
tion was,  however,  by  no  means  a  gene- 
ral one ;  it  affected  only  those  in  Rome, 
as  the  pretended  cause  of  the  great  fire.* 
[t  It  is,  however,  quite  open  to  inquiry, 
whether  aU^  who  were  then  executed  as 
Christians,  were  really  so.  For  as  they 
were  then  following  an  ignorant  cry  of 
the  people,  as  the  name  of  Christian  had 
then  become  an  object  of  the  people's 
hatred,  and  was  used  by  them  to  denote 
every  thing  they  abhorred ;  and  as  the 
people  might  easily  apply  that  name  to 
all  who,  justly  or  unjustly,  had  become 
objects  of  public  hatred,  and  as  there  was 
in  this  case  undoubtedly  no  regular  judi- 
cial inquiry,  it  is  likely  enough  that  many, 
"  quos  per  flagitia  invisos  vulgus  Chris- 
tianos appellabat,"  although  not  Chris- 
tians, were  denounced  as  Christians.  Ta- 
citus (Ann.  XV.  44.)  says,  "  those  were 
seized  first  who  confessed,"  but  we  are 
then  led  to  inquire,  "  confessed  what  ?" 
was  it  that  they  had  caused  the  fire,  or 
that  they  were  Christians  ?  In  the  first 
case,  we  must  imagine  that  they  were 
persons  who  had  actually  allowed  Nero 
to  make  use  of  them  to  cause  the  fire ; 
but  then  these  were  no  Christians,  only 
men  whom  the  multitude  branded  as 
objects  of  hatred  and  abomination  with 
the  name  of  Christians.  These  men  had 
possibly,  in  the  hope  of  bettering  their 
own  condition,  given  up  many  others 
as  Christians,  some  of  whom  might, 
and  others  might  not,  be  really  so.] 
But  that  which  befel  the  Christians  in 
the  metropolis  would  of  course  influ- 
ence their  condition  in  all  the  provinces. 
The  impression  which  these  persecutions 
and  the  truly  diabolical  character  of  Nero 
made  upon  the  Christians,  may  be  judged 
of  from  a  saying  which  was  spread  abroad 
among  the  Christian  people,  and  was  long 
remembered,  with  just  the  Christian  co- 
louring which  a  heathen  saying  would  ob- 
tain among  them,  namely,  that  Nero  was 
not  dead,  but  that  he  had  retired  beyond 
the  Euphrates,  and  would  return  as  Anti- 
christ.J    This  is  worthy  of  remark,  as  the 


*  [If  the  inscription  published  by  Gruter,  p. 
238,  2.39,  be  genuine,  this  persecution  was  felt  in 
Portugal.  The  inscription  is  given,  and  its  genu- 
ineness well  discussed,  in  Lardner,  Heathen  Test, 
ch.  iii.— H.  J.  K] 

■\  This  passage  is  incorporated  into  the  work 
from  the  addenda  to  the  tliird  volume. 

i  In  the  pseudo-Sibylline  books,  iit'  Cvcut.t.ix-\u, 


NERVALS    MILDNESS. 


66 


same  notion  was  very  often  entertained, 
in  after  times,  of  any  princes  who  caused 
great  commotions  in  the  world.  Under 
the  despotic  Domitian,  who  reified  from 
A.D.  81,  as  he  favoured  the  profession  of 
informers,  and  was  in  the  habit  of  remov- 
ing out  of  the  way,  by  various  pretences, 
those  of  whom  he  was  jealous,  or  whose 
property  he  desired,  the  accusation  of 
conversion  to  Christianity,  already  an  ob- 
ject of  bitter  hatred  (as  we  learn  from  j 
Nero's  government,)  was  probably  one 
of  the  very  commonest  counts  in  a  charge 
of  high  treason*  (crimen  majestatis.)  In 
consequence  of  this  accusation  many  were 
sentenced  to  death,  or  to  banishment  into 
an  island,  with  the  confiscation  of  their 
property.! 

The  emperor  was  also  informed  that 
there  lived  in  Palestine  two  people  from 
the  family  of  David  and  Jesus,  who  were 
occupied  in  seditious  undertakings.  The 
seditious  tendency  of  the  Jewish  expecta- 
tions of  a  Messiah  were  well  known,  and 
what  the  Christians  said  of  Christ's  king- 
dom was  often  misunderstood.^  He 
ordered  the  accused  to  be  brought  before 
him,  and  satisfied  himself  that  they  were 
poor,  innocent  countrymen,  who  were  far 
from  having  any  political  designs,  and  he 
therefore  allowed  them  to  return  home  in 
safety.§  But  this  experience  did  not  im- 
pel him  to  relax  the  ordinances  against 
Christianity  in  general,  which  had  other 
grounds.  Tertullian  (Apol.  c.  4.)  certainly 
speaks  too  generally  when  he  declares 
that  Domitian  had  only  made  an  attempt 
to  persecute  the  Christians,  which  he 
abandoned  again,  and  recalled  the  exiled. 

The  emperor  Nerva,  A.  D.  96,  from  his 
justice  and  humanity,  was  an  enemy  to 
the  system  of  informers,  which  had 
wrought  such  evil  under  his  predecessors. 
This  was  of  itself  an  advantage  to  the 
Christians,  because  one  of  the  commonest 
accusations  was  that  of  being  a  Christian. 
He  declared  all  free  who  were  condemned 
on  such  charges,  and  recalled  those  who 
had  been  banished ;  and  he  ordered  all 
the  slaves  who  had  come  forward  as  ac- 
cusers to  their  masters  to  be  executed. 


*  The  joining  together  of  sj^xX^/Utt  cSjctxtoc  and 
'icvSuioiv  ybii,  in  Dio  Cassius,  I.  Ixvii.  14.  clearly 
points  out  the  Christians. 

■\  Besides  Dio  Cassius,  another  historian,  named 
Bruttius,  in  the  chronicle  of  Eusebius,  says  that 
many  suffered  martyrdom  under  this  emperor. 

i  The  words  of  Jusl.  Mart.  Apol.  ii.  58,  prove 
this;  o«cu3-avTS:  y?it3-;/M/av  5rg',7if;xafTs«  h/aa;,  i^u^nac 

I  Hegesipp.  in  Euseb.  iii.  19,20. 


He  altogether  forbade  the  reception  of  the 
accusations  of  slaves  against  their  masters. 
This,  again,  must  have  been  of  service  to 
the  Christians,  for  many  of  the  accusations 
against  them  proceeded  from  slaves  of  in- 
different characters.  The  things  which 
under  the  preceding  government  had 
formed  the  ground  of  most  charges  and 
sentences,  could  no  longer  be  brought 
forward,  and  probably  Christianity  was 
included  in  this  general  understanding.* 
Under  the  short  administration  of  this 
emperor,  therefore,  we  see  accusations 
against  the  Christians  at  a  standstill,  but 
no  permanent  tranquillity  was  then  assured 
to  them,  nor  their  religion  recognised  by 
the  legislature  as  a  "  religio  licila."  And 
we  are  inclined  to  think  that  since  Chris- 
tianity during  these  few  years  had  been 
able  to  spread  itself  farther  without  im- 
pediment, the  restrained  fury  of  the  people 
would  break  out  after  the  death  of  this 
emperor  with  renewed  violence.  The 
new  law  of  Trajan  (A.  D.  99,)  against  se- 
cret associations  (Irat^aiai,)  might  clearly 
be  used  against  the  Christians.  Pliny  the 
younger  came  as  governor  during  this 
reign  (A.  D.  110,)  to  Bithynia  and  Pontus 
into  districts  where  the  Christians  were 
numerous.  Many  of  them  were  brought 
j  to  his  tribunal:  he  found  himself  in  no 
I  small  embarrassment,  in  consequence  of 
I  such  proceedings  being  quite  new  to  him, 
I  and  no  definite  law  existing  on  the  mat- 
ter, as  well  as  from  the  number  of  the 
Christians  ;  "  For  many,"  he  writes,  "  of 
every  age  and  rank,  of  both  sexes,  are 
implicated  in  the  danger;  for  not  only  in 
the  towns,  but  also  in  the  villages,  and  in 
the  country,  has  the  contagion  of  this  su- 
perstition spread."  The  temples  were 
forsaken,  and  the  usual  services  of  idolatry 
could  no  longer  be  maintained,  and  vic- 
tims for  sacrifice  were  rarely  brought. 
Pliny  did  not  suffer  himself,  like  his 
friend  Tacitus,  to  be  guided  by  the  vague 
reports  of  the  people,  but  took  proper  pains 
to  inform  himself  about  the  question,  and 
interrogated  those  who  had  renounced  the 
Christian  communion  for  some  years. 
We  must  remember  that  renegades  are 
seldom  inclined  to  speak  avcU  of  the  so- 
ciety to  which  they  formerly  belonged. 
With  the  usual  brutality  of  Roman  justice, 
which  never  recognised  a  human  being  in 


*  As  Dio  Cassius  mentions  the  accusation  of 
a(r€/?«a,  and  also  of  'IcvJoukoc  yg/oc,  along  with  the 
"crimen  majestatis;"  although  probably  we  are 
not  to  understand  either  a6ioT»f,  or  Christianity 
under  the  word  dcrsjg«*. 


PLINY  S    CONDUCT   TOWARD   THE    CHRISTIANS. 


57 


a  slave,  he  applied  the  torture  to  two  fe- 
male slaves,  who  had  served  the  office  of 
deaconesses  in  the  Christian  community, 
in  order  to  obtain  from  them  an  avowal 
of  the  truth ;  and  yet  all  that  he  could 
learn  was  ''  that  the  Christians  were  ac- 
customed to  meet  on  a  certain  day  (Sun- 
day,) that  they  then  sung  a  hymn  in 
praise  of  their  God  Christ,  and  that  they* 
mutually  pledged  themselves,  nol|  to  the 
commission  of  any  crime,  but  to  abstain 
from  theft  and  perjury ;  never  to  break 
their  word,  and  never  to  withhold  a  de- 
posit ;J  that  they  separated  after  this,  and 
in  the  evening  met  again  for  a  simple  and 
innocent  repast.§  And  even  these  latter 
assemblies  they  had  discontinued  in  con- 
sequence of  the  imperial  edict  against  the 
Hetariaj."  One  would  have  supposed 
that  such  a  discovery  of  the  effects  of 
Christianity  would  have  led  Pliny,  if  not 
to  further  inquiries  as  to  the  origin  and 
nature  of  a  religion,  which  produced 
effects  so  widely  differing  from  those  of 
Paganism,  on  such  a  variety  of  characters, 
yet,  at  least,  to  the  toleration  of  a  religion 
in  which  nothmg,  either  politically  or 
morally  speaking,  could  be  found  worthy 
of  pimishment.  No  such  thing !  Pliny 
was  too  completely  possessed  by  the  nar- 
row-minded, political  views  of  a  Roman, 
so  to  judge.  Unable  to  attain  to  any  view 
but  that  presented  by  his  philosophical, 
or  his  slate  religion,  he  saw  in  that  which, 
differing  as  widely  from  the  Roman  state 
religion  as  from  his  philosophical  one, 
could  yet  demand  and  obtain ||  so  great  a 
power  over  the  consciences  of  men,  only 
a  perverse  andU  extravagant  superstition. 
We  may  see  from  this  the  power  of  pre- 
vailing opinions,  even  on  good  men,  when 
they  are  not  counteracted  by  some  higher 
principle  than  human  systems  can  give. 
The  noble,  tender-hearted  Pliny,  as  he 
seems  to  be  from  his  letters,  is  here  un- 
able to  distinguish  the  man  from  the  citi- 
zen and  subject,  to  recognise  the  rights  of 


*  The  remembrance  of  the  baptismal  vow,  the 
"  sacramentum  militia;  ChristianjB,"  which  was 
often  urged  upon  their  minds  in  practical  discourses. 

•j-  A  plain  contradiction  to  the  vulgar  reports 
about  the  horrible  purposes  of  the  assemblies  of 
the  Christians. 

i  One  who  had  violated  his  baptismal  vow  by 
such  a  crime  was  excluded  from  the  communion  of 
the  Church. 

§  A  clear  contradiction  to  the  vulgar  reports 
about  the  cannibal  meals  of  the  Christians, "  epulis 
Thyesteis." 

II  Pliny  might  well  think  this  rather  too  much 
of  religion. 

1  Superstitio  prava  et  immodica. 

8 


man  as  man,  and  to  perceive  the  power  of 
free  and  firm  conviction,  as  well  as  the 
regard  it  must  command  in  every  moral 
feeling  heart.  He  required  only  a  blind 
obedience  to  the  law  of  the  slate.  The 
Christians  must  deny  their  faith,  invoke 
the  gods!  they  must  offer  incense,  and 
pour  libations  to  the  statues  of  the  empe- 
ror, as  well  as  of  the  gods,  and  curse 
Christ!  If  they  refused,  and  after  the 
governor  had  three  times,  under  a  threat 
of  death,  requested  them  to  abjure  their 
belief,  they  still  avowed  steadfastly,  that 
they  were  and  would  remain  Christians, 
Pliny  condemned  them  to  death,  as  ob- 
stinate confessors  of  a  "  religio  illicita," 
which  was  in  direct  violation  of  the  laws 
of  the  state.  Those  who  complied  with 
the  governor's  requisition,  obtained  par- 
don. It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at,  if  many 
who  embraced  Christianity  during  its  rapid 
propagation  in  these  regions  in  the  tran- 
quil times  of  Nerva,  had,  nevertheless, 
not  thoroughly  considered  what  Chris- 
tianity really  requires,  and  whether  they 
wei-e  ready  to  give  themselves  up  wholly 
to  God,  as  he  requires,  and  to  sacrifice 
every  thing  to  him ;  that  is,  if  there  were 
such  persons  as  our  Lord  describes,  Matt, 
xiii.  20 — 22.  History  often  shows  us  that 
these  sudden  conversions  have  something 
unsound  in  them.  Many,  therefore,  we  may 
suppose,  there  were  among  the  multitude 
of  the  Christians,  whose  faith  was  not 
proof  against  the  sight  of  death.  Pliny 
might  perceive,  as  the  effect  of  his  prose- 
cutions, that,  while  many  abjured  Chris- 
tianity from  the  fear  of  man,  and  the  ''  few 
chosen"  became  separated  from  the  "  many 
called"  by  the  storm  of  persecution,  the 
idolatrous  worship  of  the  heathen  temples 
revived  again  in  public.  Pliny,  who 
judged  by  appearances,  thought  that  this 
sect  might  easily  be  suppressed,  if  it  were 
treated  with  a  due  mixture  of  severity  and 
mildness  ;  if  the  obstinate  were  punished, 
to  frighten  the  rest,  and  yet  those,  who 
would  like  to'retract,  were  not  driven  to 
despair,  by  closing  the  door  of  pardon 
against  them. 

In  his  report  to  Trajan  (x.  97.)  on  this 
matter,  he  makes  also  the  following  in- 
quiries. Whether  he  should  make  any 
distinction  as  to  age,  or  deal  Avith  the 
young*  just  as  with  the  old  >  Whether 
he  should  give  room  for  repentance,  or  in 
every  case  punish  every  one  who  had 


•  It  seems  probable  that  the  number  of  chil- 
drcn  and  youni:;  people  found  among  the  Chris- 
tians gave  occasion  to  this  inquiry. 


58 


TRAJAN  S    TREATMENT    OF   THE    CHRISTIANS. 


ever  been  a  Christian?  Whether  Chris- 
tians should  be  punishable  simply  as 
Christians,  or  only  in  consequence  of 
other  crimes?  ]t  appears  from  the  con- 
duct of  Pliny,  as  governor  and  judge, 
how,  according  to  his  sentiments,  most 
of  these  inquiries  should  be  answered; 
and  the  emperor  T"rajan  approved  his  con- 
duct, and  seems  in  his  decision  to  coin- 
cide wholly  with  his  views.  He  did  not 
allow  the  Christians  to  be  classed  with 
common  criminals,  whom  the  governors 
employed  their  police*  to  detect.  Chris- 
tians were  not  to  be  sought  for,  but  when 
they  were  brought  up,  they  should  be 
punished.  The  emperor  does  not  say 
hoio ;  indeed,  he  avows,  that  on  this  part 
of  tlie  subject  he  could  not  determinef 
any  tiling  definite.  Jt  appears,  however, 
that  the  punishment  of  death  was  gene- 
rally understood;  while  pardon  was  to 
1)6  extended  to  those  who  would  re- 
nounce Christianity,  and  return  to  the 
Roman  gods. 

TertuUian  had  long  ago  pointed  out  a 
contradiction  in  this  decision.  If  the 
emperor  thought  the  Christians  criminal, 
they  ought  to  have  been  searched  for  and 
punished  like  any  other  criminals,  and 
brought  to  punishment.  If  he  thought 
them  innocent,  punishment  was  wrong  in 
every  case.  This  is  certainly  a  just 
opinion  in  a  moral  point  of  view;  but 
the  emperor  regarded  the  matter  in  a 
poUiico-juridicial  light.  He  thought  that 
it  was  impossible,  in  any  case,  to  allow 
contempt  of  the  "  Caerimoniae  Romanae," 
the  open  violation  of  the  laws  of  the  state, 
to  go  unpunished,  although  unaccom- 
panied by  any  moral  guilt.J  So  Trajan 
thought  it  necessary  to  act  wlien  any 
such  illegal  conduct  came  before  the 
governor  publicly,  but  he  wished  then  to 
wink  at  it  as  much  as  possible,  in  order 
to  spare  the  Ciiristians,  as  far  as  was 
consistent  with  a  due  observance  of  the 
laws.  He,  hke  Pliny,  believing  Chris- 
tianity to  be  a  delusion,  thought  that  if 
mercv  and  rigour  were  blended  together, 
and  if,  without  making  any  great  stir,  the 
open  offences  of  this  kind  were  punished, 
but  tliey  were  not  persecuted,  the  en- 
thusiastic fancy  would  pass,  and  the  thing 
itself  would,  by  and  by,  die  away.  Had 
there  been  nothing  higher  in  Christianity, 


the    consequences   would   have  justified 
the  opinion  of  Trajan. 

That  which  had  hitherto  been  a  mat- 
ter of  tacit  deduction,  namely,  that  Chris- 
tianity was  not  legally  received  among 
the  religions  tolerated  by  the  state,  was 
now  expressly  declared  against  Chris- 
tians by  a  distinct  law,  and  their  condi- 
tion must,  in  consequence,  very  soon 
have  changed  for  the  worse.  The  only 
search  after  Christians  which  Trajan  had 
in  his  contemplation,  was  of  a  legal  kind ; 
but  it  often  happened  that  Christians,  or 
those  suspected  to  be  so,  were  seized 
by  furious  mobs,  and  so  brought  to  the 
judgment-seat.  There  were  some  gov- 
ernors, to  whom  blood-shedding  was  a 
matter  of  indifference,  and  they  willingly 
sacrificed  these  persecuted  creatures  to 
the  fury  of  the  populace,  in  order  to 
make  themselves  beloved  in  the  province, 
and  some  who  themselves  partook  of  the 
violence  of  the  people.  Under  his  suc- 
cessor Hadrian,  they  might  imagine  them- 
selves at  liberty  to  act  thus  with  impunity, 
or  even  with  the  emperor's  approbation, 
as  he  was  known  to  be  a  zealous  sup- 
porter of  the  sacra  of  his  country.  When 
he  visited  Greece,  A.  D.  124,  and  was 
initiated  into  all  the  Grecian  mysteries, 
the  enemies  of  Christianity,  feeling  this  a 
favourable  moment,  began  immediately  to 
j)ersecute  it.  The  two  learned  Chris- 
tians, Quadratus  and  Aristides,  were  in- 
duced by  this  to  offer  to  Hadrian  two 
treatises  in  defence  of  their  fellow  be- 
lievers. Whether  these  induced  him  to 
join  the  side  of  the  Christians,  cannot  be 
decided  with  certainty;  but,  at  any  rate, 
the  emperor's  zeal  for  the  old  religion 
was  not  sufficient  to  extinguish  his  love 
of  justice.  It  was  impossible  that  an 
emperor  and  governors  who  loved  justice 
should  be  satisfied  with  tumultuous  con- 
duct, through  which  the  innocent  would 
often  be  involved  in  the  punishment  of 
the  guilty.  The  proconsul  of  Asia 
Minor,  Serennius  Granianus,  complained 
on  the  subject  to  Hadrian,  and  he  was 
induced  to  send  a  rescript  to  his  suc- 
cessor in  the  proconsul-ship,  Minucius 
Fundanus.* 


*  The  t:e,nva^X'''^  curiosi. 

•j-  Neque  enim  in  universum  aliquid,  quod 
quasi  certam  formam  habeat,  constitui  potest. 

i  As  Pliny  says,  qualecunque  esset  quod  fate- 
rentur,  pervicaciam  ccrte  et  inflexibilem  obstina- 
tionem  debere  puniri. 


*  The  genuineness  of  this  rescxipt  is  attested, 
not  only  by  the  citation  of  it  in  the  Apology  ad- 
dressed by  Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  to  the  second 
successor  of  Hadrian,  (see  Euseb.  iv.  26.)  but 
still  more  strongly  by  internal  evidence :  for  it  is 
not  to  be  believed,  that  a  Christian  could  have 
contented  himself  with  saying  so  little  in  favour 
of  the  Christians.  The  fact  of  Hadrian's  dealing 
mildly  with  the  Christians,  is  also  attested  by  tho 
praises  bestowed  on  him^  in  the  work  of  a  Chris- 


HADRIAN   AND   THE    CHRISTIANS. 


The  emperor  declared  himself  strongly 
against  a  conduct,  by  which  the  innocent 
might  be  disturbed,  and  which  might 
give  rise  to  false  accusations,  for  the 
sake  of  extorting  money,  by  threatening 
to  accuse  people  as  suspected  Christians.* 
All  accusations  against  the  Christians 
were  to  be  preferred  in  the  legal  forms, 
and  no  measures  taken  against  them  on 
mere  popular  clamour.  If  Christians 
were  legally  charged,  and  proved  guilty 
of  actions!  contrary  to  the  laws,  they 
were  to  be  punished  according  to  their 
guilt;  but,  at  the  same  time,  false  ac- 
cusers were  to  suffer  heavy  punishment. 
Similar  rescripts  were  sent  by  the  em- 
peror to  other  quarters.J  This  edict 
may  have  been  understood  as  an  edict  of 
toleration  with  regard  to  Christianity. 
Under  the  name  of  "false  accusers," 
those  may  be  understood  who  accused 
the  Christians  of  nefarious  practices  from 
mere  common  report ;  and  the  emperor 
may  have  meant  that  the  avowal  and 
exercise  of  the  Christian  religion  should 
not  be  considered  criminal,  and  that  only 
decided  crimes  should  be  punished  in  the 
Christians  just  as  in  other  people.  Thus 
the  emperor  would,  in  this  case,  have  re- 
ceived Christianity  into  the  number  of 
the  "religiones  licita; :"  but  if  that  was 
his  intention,  there  needed  a  more  ex- 
plicit declaration  of  what  he  understood 
by  the  words  "contrary  to  the  laws." 
Some  particular  and  express  declaration 
was  evidently  needed  on  the  subject, 
after  the  rescript  of  Trajan,  if  the  very 
non-observance   of  the  Roman    religion, 

tian,  who  probably  wrote  not  long  after  these 
times,  i.  e.  in  the  fifth  book  of  the  pseudo-Sibylline 
Prophecies. 

Aoyv^Mgdoiii  i"v»g  T/f  i'  S3"<rfT:t<  WMUrL  TroiTiu, 
E-TTXl  KM  ^stlriP.'OTif  dvXg  KOU  TTdLyTSi  VOMit. 

*  I  think  that  Rufinus  had  the  Latin  original 
before  him,  but  that  Eusebius,  as  often  happens, 
has  not  translated  it  accurately.  Eusebius  says, 
ivti.  tin  T'Ji  (rvx.ifa.VTU4;  -^-..^iiyix  Kouiw^yta.;  Trxpio-^An  : 
Kufinus,  •'  Ne  calumniatoribus  latrocinandi  tri- 
buatur  occasio."  One  cannot  very  well  see  how 
Hufinus  could  change  the  general  term  KXKwgyia. 
into  the  special  one,  "  latrocinatio,"  to  which  the 
context  does  not  seem  at  all  to  point ;  while 
Eusebius,  on  the  contrary,  was  likely  enough 
inaccurately  to  put  a  general  for  a  particular  term. 
'•  Latrocinari"  is  here  synonymous  with  "con- 
cutere"  in  other  places,  and  the  words  of  Tertul- 
lian  to  Scapula,  when  he  began  to  persecute  the 
Christians,  may  serve  as  a  commentary  on  this 
passage — "  Parce  provincia;,  quae  visa  intentione 
tua  obnoxia  facta  est  coiicussionibuset  militum  et 
inimicorum  suorum  cuique." 

■j-  Eos  advcrsuni  leges  quicquani  agere. 

i  According  to  Melito  of  Sardis,  loc.  cit 


59 

and  the  exercise  of  Christianity,*  was  no 
longer  to  be  held  "contrary  to  the  laws  '' 
The  oidy  thing  which  clearly  results 
from  this  decree  is,  that  it  was  in  opposi- 
tion to  riotous  attacks  on  persons,  as 
being  suspected  of  Christianity,  and  re- 
quired legal  proceedings  in  all  accusa- 
tions of  them.  Only  in  the  case  of  gov- 
ernors inclined  to  favour  them,  the 
indefinite  expressions  of  the  edict  might 
perhaps  be  turned  to  the  ailvantage  of  the 
Christians.| 

Those  measures  were,  however,  due 
rather  to  his  love  of  justice  than  to  any 
regard  for  Christianity  or  Christians,  for 
Hadrian  was,  as  we  remarked  above,  a 
zealous  and  precise  observer  of  the  old 
Roman  and  also  of  the  Grecian  religion, 
and  despised  foreign  ones  (peregrina 
sacra.)  See  ^Eiius  Spartianus,  Vita  Ha- 
drian!, c.  xxii.  This  disposition  is  shown 
in  the  remarkable  letter  of  this  emperor 
to  tlie  consul  Servianus,  concerning  the 
Alexandrians.;|;  Although  he  may,  per- 
haps, in  this  place  be  speaking  of  the 
curious  mixture  of  the  various  elements 
of  different  religions  in  Alexandria,  rather 
than  of  Cliristianity  in  general,  yet  as  a 
friend  to  Christianity  his  language  would 
have  been  different.  The  relation,  there- 
fore, of  jElius  Lampridius  (Alexander 
Severus,  ch.  xxiv.)  an  historian  of  the 
early  part  of  the  fourth  century,  is  incre- 


*  Although  Melito  of  Sardis  says  to  Marcus 
Aurelius  afterwards,  that  his  predecessors  had 
honoured  Christianity  in  connection  with  other 
religions  (rrgof  tu.i;  axx^ic  d^n^mt-jut  iTiuticruv,)  we 
cannot  conclude  much  from  this ;  for  it  is  natural 
enough  that  a  person,  who  was  claiming  the  pro- 
tection of  the  emperor  for  Christianity,  should  lay 
as  much  stress  as  possible  on  any  thing  in  the 
measures  of  his  predecessors,  which  either  really 
favoured,  or  appeared  to  favour,  the  Christians. 

-(-  Tertullian  ad  Scapulam,  c.  iv.  brings  forward 
instances  of  governors  who  made  use  of  the  re- 
script to  save  the  Christians.  One  was  Ves- 
pronius  Candidus,  who  released  a  Christian  who 
was  brought  before  him,  under  the  plea  that  it 
was  against  the  order  to  obey  the  cry  of  the  mul- 
I  titude,  "quasi  tumultuosum  civilem*  satisfacere.'' 
I  Another  was  Pudens,  who,  when  he  had  ascer- 
[  tained  from  the  protocol  (clogium,  the  committal 
I  or  the  proccs-verbal,)  with  which  a  Christian  had 
j  been  sent  to  him,  that  lie  had  been  seized  upon 
j  with  threats  and  in  a  tumultuous  manner,  (con- 
cussione  ejus  intellecta)  lot  him  go,  declaring  that 
without  a  certain  and  legal  accuser,  he  could  not 
try  him  according  to  law. 

^  Flavii  Vopisci  Saturnius,  c,  ii. 

*  I  leave  this  quotation  as  I  find  it,  although  I 
cannot  construe  it.  In  my  edition  of  Tertull.  ad 
Scap.  (Canibr.  IfiSfi,)  it  stands  thus:  "  Quasi 
tumultuosum  civibiis  suii>  ptisfacere,"  which  is 
intelligible  enough. — H.  J.  R. 


60 


PERSECUTION  UNDER  M.  AURELIUS. 


dible,  when  he  asserts  that  the  emperor, 
in  the  intention  of  receiving  Christ  among 
the  Roman  gods,  had  in  all  cities  temples 
without  statues,  which  were  called  Tem- 
pla  Iladriani;*  but  that  he  Avas  withheld 
from  the  fulfilment  of  his  intention  by  the 
representation  of  the  priests.  How  this 
report  arose  among  the  Christian  people, 
without  any  historical  ground,  admits  of 
a  ready  elucidation,  if  we  reflect  that 
nothing  was  known  of  the  destination  of 
these  temples,  and  that  this  emperor  was 
looked  upon  in  a  very  exaggerated  light 
as  the  protector  of  the  Christians,  and  so, 
by  putting  these  two  things  together,  they 
attributed  to  this  emperor  what  really  was 
the  case  with  others,  as  for  instance 
Alexander  Severus. 

Under  this  government,  which  in  the 
Roman  empire  favoured  the  Christians, 
tliey  suffered  in  another  quarter  a  severe 
persecution.  When  Barchochab,  whom 
the  Jews  believed  to  be  the  Messiah,  and 
under  whose  conduct  they  revolted  from 
the  Romans,  could  not  induce  the  Chris- 
tians in  Palestine  to  deny  their  faith,  and 
take  part  in  the  revolt,  he  executed  all 
who  fell  into  his  hands  by  cruel  and 
painful  deaths. 

After  the  death  of  Hadrian,  A.  D.  138, 
the  efficacy  of  his  edict  against  the  attacks 
of  popular  fury  passed  away.  There 
arose,  besides,  under  the  government  of 
Antoninus  Pius,  public  calamities,  which 
excited  afresh  the  rage  of  the  populace,  a 
famine,  overflowings  of  the  Tiber,  earth- 
quakes in  Asia  Minor  and  Rhodes,  and 
desolating  fires  in  Rome,  Antioch,  and 
Carthage.f  The  gentle  and  humane  dig- 
position  of  the  emperor  could  not  view 
with  satisfaction  these  outbreakings  of 
popular  wrath,  and  in  dillerent  rescripts 
addressed  to  the  Greek  states,  he  expressly 
condemned  this  violent  conduct.  But  this 
emperor  must  have  done  even  more  for 
the  Christians,  if  a  rescript,  ascribed  in 
all  probabdity  to  him,  and  not  to  his  suc- 
cessor Marcus  Aurelius,  vvere  genuine,  die 
rescript  to  the  council  of  Asia  Minor  {w^oi 
TO  xoivov  TD?  'A<rta?,)  for  he  therein  ex- 
pressly declares,  that  the  Christians  should 
be  punislied  only  in  case  of  tlieir  being 
convicted  of  political  crimes;  and,  on  the 
contrary,  any  one  who  accused  another 
simply  on  the  ground  of  his  being  a 
Christian,  should  himself  be  liable  to  pun- 
ishment. But  the  language  of  the  rescript 
is  rather  that  of  a  heathen  emperor,  espe- 


cially of  one  whose  peculiar  praise  was 
"insignis  erga  caerimonias  publicas  cura 
ac  religio,"  (Fabretti  Marmor.)  and  the 
history  of  the  consecutive  times  does  not 
bespeak  the  existence  of  such  an  edict.* 
Under  the  government  of  the  next  em- 
peror, Marcus  Aurelius,  the  philosopher, 
many  public  calamities  arose  which  ex- 
cited the  rage  of  the  populace  against  the 
Christians,  especially  a  desolating  pesti- 
lence, which,  extending  itself  by  degrees 
from  Ethiopia  to  Gaul,  infested  the  whole 
Roman  empire.  During  this  time  the 
magician  Alexander,  in  Asia  Minor  (see 
above,)  excited  the  zeal  of  the  people  for 
their  own  gods,  from  whom  he  promised 
miraculous  assistance,  and  thus  also  he 
excited  the  wrath  of  the  people  against  the 
Christians.  But  had  there  been  nothing 
here  but  popular  fury,  and  had  this  empe- 
ror been  of  the  same  sentiments  as  his 
predecessor,  this  ebullition  would  soon 
have  been  repressed.  On  the  contrary, 
however,  we  see  under  his  government  the 
people  and  the  higher  officers  of  the  state 
united  together  against  the  Christians. 
They  were  so  severely  persecuted  in  Asia 
Minor,  that  Bishop  Melito,  of  Sardis,  their 
advocate  with  the  emperor,  says,  "The 
race  of  the  worshippers  of  God  in  Asia 
Minor,  are  now  persecuted  more  than  ever 
was  the  case  before,  in  consequence  of 
neio  edicts,  for  shameless  informers,  thirst- 
ing after  other  men's  property,  now  plun- 
der the  guiltless  by  day  and  night,  when- 
ever they  can  find  any  grounds  for  it  in 
the  edicts.  And  we  object  not  to  this,  if 
it  proceeds  from  your  command,  for  a  just 
emperor  would  never  decide  unjustly,  and 
we  willingly  bear  the  happy  lot  of  such  a 
death;  and  we  only  make  this  petition  to 
you,  that  you  would  acquaint  yourself 
with  those  who  are  thus  persecuted,  and 
judge  fairly  whether  they  deserve  punish- 
ment and  death,  or  safety  and  tranquillity. 
If,  however,  this  new  decree  and  this  de- 
cision comes  not.  from  you  yourself,  a 
decree  such  as  would  be  unbecoming  even 
against  barbarian  enemies,  we  pray  you 
the  more  earnestly,  not  to  suffer  us  to  be 
a  prey  to  such  rapacity."|     These  words 


*  '  A(fgwvsw,  so  Aristid.  Oral.  Sacr.  1. 
•J-  Jul.  Capitolini  Vita  Antoniiii  Pii,  c.  ix. 


*  Eusebius,  however,  says,  that  Melito  of  Sardis, 
in  his  Apology,  addressed  to  the  successor  of  An- 
toninus Pius,  appeals  to  this  rescript ;  but  it  strikes 
one  immediately,  that  Melito,  in  the  fragment 
quoted  by  Euseliius  (loc.  laud.,)  just  exactly  does 
not  quote  the  rescript,  for  that  would  have  been 
far  more  favourable  for  the  Christians  than  the 
edict  quoted,  by  Melito.  [See  Moyle's  works,  ji. 
236 ;  and  ("hevalier's  Apostolical  Epistles,  p.  278. 
— H.  .1.  R.] 

f  [Dr.  Neander  is  either  misprinted,  or  he  has 


M.  AURELIUS — HIS  NOTIONS  OF  THE  CHRISTIANS. 


61 


of  Melito,  where  Christian  dignity  is 
mingled  with  Christian  prudence,  lead  us 
to  many  observations.  Immediately  after 
the  publication  of  Trajan's  edict,  a  Chris- 
tian once  accused  might  be  punished  u-ith 
death ;  and  this  edict  was  never  officially 
revoked,  although  the  mildness  of  the  last 
emperor  in  this  respect  may  have  pre- 
vented its  severe  and  literal  execution. 
But  Melito  informs  us  that  a  new  and  ter- 
rible edict  had  been  put  forth  by  the  pro- 
consul, iriviting  informations  agai7ist  the 
Christians.  This  is  the  more  striking  un- 
der the  government  of  this  emperor,  who 
was  by  no  means  inclined  to  approve  of  the 
infamous  trade  of  informers,*  and  whose 
principle  seemed  rather  to  be  to  lighten 
those  punishments  which  the  laws  de- 
nounced against  crime.|  We  can  hardly 
imagine  that  the  proconsul  would  have 
ventured  to  publish  a  new  edict  on  his 
authority,  and  Melito  appears  to  be  quite 
persuaded  that  it  came  from  the  emperor 
himself;  while  at  the  same  time  he  ex- 
presses himself  doubtfully  on  the  point,  in 
order  that  he  might  ask  its  repeal  with  a 
better  grace. 

Let  us  now  consider  generally  the  senti- 
ments of  this  emperor  towards  the  Chris- 
tians, in  connection  with  his  philosophical 
and  religious  systems,  and  see  what  results 
from  it  in  relation  to  his  actual  conduct 
towards  the  Christians.  His  cold,  con- 
templative stocism,  could  never  make  him 
their  friend;  the  objects  of  his  highest 
admiration  were  a  calmness  that  proceeded 
from  philosophical  speculation,  and  a  re- 
signation which  could  coolly  contemplate 
even  the  annihilation  of  our  personality, 
as  we  have  above  remarked ;  but  he  had 
no  sympathy  with  calmness  and  resigna- 
tion, that  arose  from  a  living  faith,  and  a 
hope  founded  on  that  faith,  and  animated 
by  it.  The  spirit  with  which  the  Chris- 
tian martyrs  met  death,  nay,  even  in  many 
instances  sought  it  (although  the  Church 
in  general  condemned  this  latter  custom,) 
appeared  to  him  a  mere  delusion  of  en- 
thusiasm; for  the  faith  from  which  this 
spirit  proceeded,  no  man  could  communi- 
cate to  another  by  philosophical  demon- 
stration. The  principle  which  the  Chris- 
tians acted  on,  rathei  to  die  than  to  do 
what  was  required  of  them,  Marcus  Au- 
relius  was  as  little  able  to  appreciate  as 


1  Pliny  had  been.  He  also  could  only  see 
j  in  this  a  blind  opposition  to  the  laws  of 
'  the  state,  and  his  philosophical  bigotry 
I  would  assist  in  inflaming  his  political  zeal. 
j  We  shall  transcribe  here  the  very  words 
I  of  this  emperor  in  regard  to  the  Chris- 
tians ;  they  are  taken  from  his  Meditations, 
(xi.  3.)  "The  soul  must  be  prepared 
I  when  it  must  leave  the  body,  either  to 
I  be  extinguished,  or  to  be  dissolved,  or 
j  to  remain  a  little  longer  with  the  body. 
-This  readiness  must  proceed  from  free 
i  choice,  and  not  from  mere  obstinacy,*  as 
,  in  the  Christians;  and  it  must  also  be  the 
^  result  of  contemplation,  and  a  lofty  spirit, 
I  Avithout  any  theatrical  elTect,  so  that  a  man 
j  should  also  be  able  to  persuade  another  to 
j  the  same  course."  In  this  point  of  view, 
therefore,  although  he  might  find  the 
Christians  guilty  of  no  moral  offence,  and 
probably  disbelieve  the  often  refuted  tales 
about  them,  yet  he  might  consider  them 
as  enthusiasts,  dangerous  to  the  well-being 
of  civil  society,  and  as  he  remarked  that 
Christianity,  under  the  mild  government 
of  the  last  emperor,  was  constantly  taking 
deeper  root,  he  might  think  it  necessary 
to  oppose  its  increase  by  severe  measures. 
There  may  be  in  philosophy,  just  as  well 
I  as  in  any  thing  else,  a  bigoted  attachment 
to  certain  notions  and  ideas,  which  renders 
men  intolerant  and  fond  of  persecution. 
It  is  well,  indeed,  that  Plato's  wish  of 
seeing  philosophy  united  with  sovereign 
poAver,  can  rarely  be  realised.  Plato 
would  be  right,  if  by  his  philosophy  true 
wisdom  is  understood,  wdiich  never  can 
be  learned  in  a  school ;  but  the  philoso- 
phy of  a  school,  united  with  sovereign 
power,  would  assuredly  be  a  most  fruitful 
source  of  oppression. 

We  should,  nevertheless,  be  judging 
most  unjustly,  if  we  represented  this  em- 
peror to  ourselves  as  a  philosopher,  whom 
certain  general  notions  had  taught  proudly 
to  despise  the  religious  faith  of  other  men. 
We  find  in  him  a  certain  child-like  piety, 
which  he  owed,  not  to  his  stoicism,  but, 
after  his  own  confession,  to  the  infiuencej 


mistranslated  Eusebius  here;  he  leaves  out  the 
negative  in  this  sentence,  and  thus  makes  it  non- 
sense. In  my  edition  the  negative  .stands. — II.  J. 
R.     The  passage  is  in  Euseb.  iv.  26.] 

*  Julii  Capitolini  Vita,  c.  xi. 

■j-  L.  c.  c.  xxiv. 


•  Mn  Kvra.  -^iKnv  !Tas«T3|/v ;  pervicacia,  obsti- 
natio. 

f  wrfg*  Txc  /ux^o;  ro  fisjiri/???.  [In  the  Soirees  de 
S.  Petersbourg  there  is  an  eloquent  passage  on  this 
subject,  of  which  it  will  not  be  out  of  place  to 
quote  the  beginning  here: — "It  liclongs  to  our 
sex,  no  doubt,  to  form  mathematicians,  tactitians. 
chemists,  &c.,  but  that  which  one  calls  Man,  that 
is  to  say,  the  moral  Man,  is  formed  perhaps  at  ten 
years  of  age,  and  if  a  man  has  not  thus  been 
formed  upon  his  mother's  knees,  he  will  feel  it  a 
heavy  misfortune  throughout  his  life.  Nothing 
can  stand  in  the  place  of  such  an  education.     If 


62 


M.  AURELItJS HIS  NOTIONS  OF  THE  CHRISTIANS. 


of  a  pious  mother  on  his  education.  And 
though  his  chikl-like  piety  sometimes  at- 
taches itself  to  the  superstition  of  the 
popular  religion,  yet  even  this  child-like 
piety  gives  a  far  more  honourable  testi- 
mony lo  the  disposition  of  the  emperor, 
than  the  proud  feelings  of  a  haughty  deism 
ever  could  have  done.  The  following  are 
a  kw  traits  of  his  religious  creed.  To 
the  same  inquiry  which  was  proposed  to 
the  Christians,  "  Where  hast  thou  seen 
the  gods,  or  where  hast  thou  learnt  their 
existence,  so  that  thou  shouldest  honour 
them  thus  .^"  he  answers,  "  First,*  they 
are  visible  even  to  our  eyes ;  besides,  I  have 
never  seen  my  soul,  and  yet  I  treat  it  with 
reverence:  so  also,  when  1  constantly  ex- 
perience the  power  of  the  gods,  I  learn  to 
recognise  their  existence,  and  I  honour 
theni."!  This  experience  of  the  power 
of  God  was  certainly  no  delusion.  It  was 
the  living  God,  to  him  an  unknown  God, 
whom  he  might  have  learned  to  know 
from  the  Gospel,  but  whom  he  worshipped 
imder  the  name  of  those  creatures  of  his 
imagination.  When  he  looked  back  upon 
the  Divine  guidance,  which  had  accompa- 
nied him  from  childhood,  he  said,  "  As 
far  as  depends  on  the  gods,  and  the  influ- 
ence which  descends  from  them  on  me, 
their  guidance  and  their  inspiration,  I 
might  already  have  attained  to  a  life  con- 
formable to  the  rules  of  nature ;  but  that 
I  have  fallen  short  of  this  aim,  is  my  own 
fault,  and  I  owe  it  to  my  neglect  of  the 
warnings,  nay,  of  the  express  instructions, 
of  the  gods.'"J  The  distinction  which 
he  saw  between  an  outward  abstinence 
from  evil,  and  a  true  inward  holiness,  and 
the  recognition  of  the  sinfulness  of  all 
mankind,  must,  one  would  have  thought, 
have  led  him  to  the  notion  of  a  Redeemer 
from  sin  ;  but  he  explained  these  truths  to 
himself  by  means  of  his  stoic  doctrine  of 
fatalism — and  in  regard  to  this  also  he 
learned  to  practise  a  stoic  resignation;  for 
lie  says,  '-When  thou  seest  another  sin, 
think  that  thou  thyself  sinnest  oftentimes, 
and  art  just  such  an  one  thyself.  And 
even  thougii  thou  abstainest  from  many 
sins,  yet  thou  hast  within  thee  the  inclina- 


tion to  such  practices,  though  from  fear, 
from  vanity,  or  some  similar  disposition, 
thou  avoidest  them.*  He  was  honestly 
devoted  to  the  religion  of  the  state  and 
of  the  people,  although  he  endeavoured 
to  avoid  the  abject  and  extravagant  super- 
stition which  was  in  vogue  among  the 
heathen  of  his  time."!"  He  believed,  for 
instance,  as  well  as  his  contemporaries, 
that  the  gods  proclaim  by  dreams  the 
means  of  recovery  from  diseases,  and  he 
thought  that  he  had  often  experienced 
their  assistance.!  When  the  pestilence 
we  mentioned  above  was  raging  in  Italy, 
I  he  saw  in  it  a  warning  to  revive  the  old 
worship  in  all  its  power.  He  invited 
priests  from  all  quarters  to  Rome,§  and 
delayed  his  departure  to  the  war  against 
Marcomanni,  during  the  religious  solemni- 
ties, by  which  he  had  hopes  of  driving 
away  the  pestilence.  Many  even  of  the 
heathens  vented  their  sarcastic  humour  on 
the  number  of  victims  he  offered  up  during 
his  preparation  for  this  war.!| 

We  can  from  these  circumstances,  ex- 
plain the  fact  how  Marcus  Aurelius,  dis- 
tinguished as  he  was  for  a  love  of  justice, 
and  for  the  mildness  which  shines  forth, 
as  well  in  his  conduct  as  in  his  writings, 
might  nevertheless,  while  he  sought  to 
maintain  the  old  state  religion,  become, 
from  political  and  religions  motives  a  pei-- 
secutor  of  Christianity,  which  was  then 
extending  itself  every  where.  A  law  of 
his  is  extant,  in  which  he  condemns  to 
banishment  on  an  island,  all  those  "  who 
do  any  thing  with  the  intention  of  terrify- 
ing the  light  dispositions  of  men  by  the 
fear  of  the  Deity."!!  It  is  not  immediately 
to  be  concluded  that  this  law  was  made 
against  the  Christians,  because  in  those 
days  there  were  many  goetae  and  impos- 
tors, against  whom  it  may  justly  have 
been  directed.  But  the  emperor,  M.  Au- 
relius, may  very  readily  have  classed  these 
people  and  Christians  together,  as  Celsus 
has  done,  who  wrote  against  the  Chris- 
tians in  his  time.  This  prince  was  in- 
clined to  pardon  those  who  confessed 
their  crimes  and  showed  repentance,  even 
in  cases  where  he  might  have  punished 
without  being  considered  severe.      (See 


the  mother  has  made  it  a  duty  to  j^rave  deeply  the 
Divine  character  on  the  forehead  of  her  son,  we 
may  be  almost  sure  that  the  hand  of  vice  will 
never  he  aiile  to  efface  it.  Vol.  i.  p.  215. — 
H.  J.  R.] 

*  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  emperor  here 
alluil<!S  to  the  stars,  as  visible  divinities,  or  to  the 
appearances  of  tlie  gods  in  visions  and  dreams. 
The  latter  seems  the  most  probalile  supposition. 

f  L.  xiii.  c.  28.  t  I.  17. 


*T/ib.  xi.  18. 

f  He  desired  a  6i^<rt£iia.  without  a  SufriSu/xmct.. 
t  I-  17.         §  Jul.  Capitol,  c.  xiii.  c.  xxi. 
II  Hence  the  epii^ram   recorded  by   Ammianus 
Marccllinus,  L.  xxv.  c.  4.     oi  x«ux;/  /S;s.-  Msfxa)  tm 

Tl  "  lU'legandum  ad  insulam,  qui  aliquid  fecerit, 
([uo  loves  hominuin  animi  superstitionc  numinis 
terreantur."     From  the  Pandects. 


M.    AURELIUS — HIS    NOTIONS    OP    THE    CHRISTIANS. 


63 


the  example  of  Capitolinus,  ch.  xiii.) 
But  the  Christians  never  would  acknow- 
ledge that  they  had  done  wrong,  and  otdy 
persisted  the  more  in  what  the  laws  for- 
bade them  to  do.  On  this  very  account 
the  emperor  may  have  ordered  that  every 
means  should  be  tried  to  force  them  to 
recant,  and  that  the  punishment  of  death 
should  be  indicted  only  in  extreme  cases, 
where  nothing  would  move  them  to  give 
in.  But  even  thus  an  ill-judged  humanity, 
wiiose  only  view  was  to  spare  tlie  effusion 
of  blood,  may  have  been  the  occasion  of 
many  cruel  tortures. 

If  we  now  put  together  what  we  find 
peculiar  in  the  nature  of  the  persecutions 
of  this  time,  we  obtain  a  result  combining 
two  circumstances,  yir^-if,  that  inquisition 
for  Christians  was  ordered  by  the  laws, 
although  the  fury  of  the  populace  fre- 
quendy  out-stripped  the  legal  proceedings 
of  public  functionaries.  According  to  the 
edict  of  Trajan,  no  such  inquisition  was  to 
be  made,  but  now,  on  the  contrary,  the 
Christians,  were  eagerly  sought  for,  and 
were  often  obliged  to  escape  by  hiding 
themselves,  as  appears  from  the  several 
accounts  of  the  persecutions,  and  from 
the  expressions  of  Celsus.*  Up  to  this 
time  then,  the  treatment  they  had  experi- 
enced was  this  :  the  Christians  who  were 
accused  and  would  not,  after  repeated  re- 
quests^ abjure  their  faith^  were  executed 
without  the  application  of  tortures !  JVoiv, 
it  was  attempted  to  force  the  Christians  to 
recant  by  the  use  of  tortures.  An  edict 
which  is  still  extant,  under  the  name  of 
the   ■[Emperor   Aurelianus,  (which    pro- 


Celsus  says  of  the  Christians,  (  viii.  p.  4 1 8,)  it-. 


<pfjy<,VTi;  X.-U  x.etjTrT.fji.tnt,  «  uX/a-*;^5li;, 


and, 


(viii.  p.  436,)  u[ji.m  Jt  x.  v  ■rK^vxruj  ri;,  in  K^ibxvmv, 

-j-  This  edict,  which  is  preserved  for  us  in  the 
Acta  SyiTiphoriani,  of  which  we  shall  have  to  speak 
hereafter,  is  thus  expressed  in  the  orisfinal : 

".■Vurelianus  Iniperator  omnibus  adiniriistratori- 
bus  suis  atque  rcctoribus.  Comperimus  ab  his, 
qui  se  temporibus  nostris  Christianos  dicunt,  le- 
gum  praecepta  violari.  Hos  comprehensos,  nisi 
diis  noslris  sacrificaverint,  diversis  punitc  cruciati- 
bus,  quatenus  habeat  distinclio  prolata  justitiani 
et  in  resecandis  criminibus  ultio  termiaata  jam 
finern." 

No  aim  appears  likely  to  be  answered  by  the 
forgery  of  such  an  edict,  its  lans^uage  is  the  ofTicial 
language  of  the  day,  and  its  whole  spirit  breathes 
the  Roman  statesman,  so  that  an  unprejudiced 
person  can  scarcely  believe  it  spurious.  If  it  l)e- 
longs  to  the  time  of  Aurelianus,  whose  name  it 
bears,  the  martyr,  in  whose  history  it  stands,  must 
have  died  in  his  reign.  But  it  is.  diflicult  to  be- 
lieve, that  under  this  emperor  they  proceeded  to 
shed  (christian  blood  (see  below.)  Also  the  man- 
ner in  which  it  speaks  of  Christians,  as  not  then 


bably,  as  Pagi  and  Ruinart  jusily  suspect, 
stixnds  for  Aurelius,)  coincides  exactly 
witli  this  account,  and  as  it  bears  every 
mark  of  genuineness  in  its  language  and 
matter,  it  is  not  improbable  that  it  may  be 
the  very  edict  sent  by  this  emperor  to  the 
governors  of  the  provinces.  It  runs  thus  : 
— "  We  have  heard  that  the  laws  are  vio- 
lated by  those  who  in  our  times  call  them- 
selves Christians.  Seize  these  people, 
and  if  they  refuse  to  sacrifice  to  our  gods, 
punish  them  with  various  kinds  of  tor- 
ments, in  such  a  manner,  however,  that 
justice  be  mingled  with  your  severity,  and 
that  the  punishment  cease,  when  the  ob- 
ject is  attained  of  extirpating  the  crime!" 
This  last  addition  suits  exactly  the  cha- 
racter of  Aurelius  ;  the  governors  were  to 
look  steadfastly  at  the  object  he  had  in 
view,  namely,  to  abolish  Christianity, 
which  was  at  variance  with  the  state  re- 
ligion, and  to  lead  back  the  people  to  the 
worship  of  the  Roman  gods  ;  but  they 
were  not  to  give  themselves  up  to  the  dic- 
tates of  blind  passion.  The  caution  might 
be  humane  enough,  but  it  was  totally  in- 
sufficient to  restrain  men  from  cruel  and 
arbitrary  measures. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  a  more  de- 
tailed consideration  of  the  progress  of 
these  persecutions  in  the  provinces,  and 
the  conduct  of  the  Christians  under  them, 
after  the  narration  of  credible  authorities. 
We  have,  in  the  first  place,  a  circumstan- 
tial account  of  the  persecution  in  the  year 
167,  in  which  the  Church  of  Smyrna  lost 
their  old  and  venerai)le  bishop,  Polycarp, 
the  disciple  of  St.  John,  and  of  which  this 
Church  has  given  a  detailed  narrative  in  a 
circular,  addressed  to  other  Christian 
Churches.*  The  then  proconsul  of  Asia 
Minor  does  not  appear  to  have  been  per- 
sonally hostile  to  the  Christians ;  but 
the  heathen  people,  with  whom  the  Jew- 
ish  rabble  joined  themselves,  were   en- 


bcing  an  old  sect,  appears  to  suit  the  time  of  Au- 
relius better  than  that  of  Aurelianus,  in  which  the 
Christian  sect  had  so  long  openly  existed.  Also, 
the  accusation  against  the  Christians,  that  the  ex- 
ercise of  their  religion  was  a  violation  of  the  laws 
of  the  state,  could  hardly  be  brought  forward  under 
the  f^mperor  Aurelian,  for  Christianity  in  thatcase 
had  been  recognised  as  a  "religio  licila"  fifteen 
years,  when  this  edict  appeared.  Most  undoubt- 
edly, therefore,  we  must  read  Aurelius  inste.\d  of 
Aurelianus,  two  names  which  are  constanlly  inter- 
changed. Lucius  Aurelius  Commodus  was  favour- 
able to  the  Christians,  and  therefore,  he  is  o\it  of 
the  question  ;  it  suits  no  one  but  the  Einjicror 
Marcus  Aurelius  Antonius. 

*  Partly  quoted  in  Eusebius,  (iv.  l.").)  but  more 
at  large  in  the  collection  of  the  Patres  Apostolicu 


64  POLYCARP    FLIES. 

raged  against  them,  and  the  proconsul  | 
yielded  compliance  to  the  fury  of  the 
people,  and  the  demands  of  tlie  law.  He 
endeavoured  to  move  the  Christians  to 
recantation  by  threats,  by  the  sight  of  the 
torture,  and  of  wild  beasts,  to  whom  they 
were  to  be  thrown  ;  and  if  they  remained 
steadfast  in  their  faith,  he  condemned  them 
to  death.  Jn  one  respect  he  certainly 
yielded  too  far  to  the  savage  cruelty  of 
the  people,  and  that  was  in  choosing  pain- 
ful and  ignominious  kinds  of  death,  such 
as  throwing  them  to  wild  beasts,  or 
making  them  perish  on  the  funeral  pile, 
for  the  law  did  not  require  this  from  him. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  as  the  law  de- 
nounced in  general  terms  sentence  of 
death  against  obstinate  adherence  to  Chris- 
tianity, people  chose  to  suppose  that  per- 
sons who  were  no  Roman  citizens,  must 
die  an  ignominious  death.*  Under  the 
severest  tortures,  even  such  as  raised  the 
pity  of  the  heathen  themselves,  the  Chris- 
tians showed  great  tranquillity  and  calm- 
ness. "  They  showed  us  all,"  says  the 
Church,  "  that  they  were  absent  from  their 
bodies  during  these  torments,  or  rather 
that  the  Lord  stood  by  them,  and  con- 
versed with  ttiem ;  and,  relying  on  the 
grace  of  Christ,  they  despised  the  tor- 
ments of  the  world."  But  the  difference 
was  here  exhibited  between  the  passing 
intoxication  of  enthusiasm,  which  though 
it  seeks  danger  with  rash  self-confidence, 
turns  to  cowardice  at  the  presence  of 
death ;  and  that  resolute  devotedness  to 
God,  which  waits  for  the  call  of  God,  and 
then  seeks  strength  from  him.  A  certain 
Quintus,  of  Phrygia,  a  nation  peculiarly 
liable  to  fantastic  and  exaggerated  feelings, 
with  many  others  who  had  been  seized 
with  this  enthusiastic  fire  from  his  per- 
suasion, appeared  before  the  tribunal  of 
the  proconsul  of  his  own  accord,  and  de- 
clared himself  a  Christian ;  a  conduct 
which,  although  always  blamed  by  the 
Christian  Church,  gave  an  opportunity  to 
the  heathen  to  represent  Christians,  as  a 
set  of  restless  enthusiasts,  who  ran  into 
danger  and  death,  in  the  blindness  of  a 


*  Such  punishments  were  assigned  by  law  to 
many  of  the  crimes  of  which  the  people's  blind 
fanaticism  accused  the  Christians.  "  Qui  sacra 
impia  nocturnave,  ut  quem  obcantarcnt,  fecerint 
faciendave  curaverint,  aut  cruci  sufllguntur,  aut 
bestiis  objiciuntur.  Qui  hominem  immolaverint, 
sive  ejus  sanguine  Htaverint,  fanum  tcmplumvc 
polluerint,  bestiis  objiciuntur,  vcl  si  honcstiores 
sint,  capite  puniuntur.  Magica;  artis  conscios 
summo  supplicio  affici  placuit,  id  est  bestiis  objici 
aut  cruci  sufllgi,  ipsi  autcm  magi  vivi  exuruntur. 
Julius  Paulus  in  sentcntiis  rcccptis." 


deluded  imagination.  Now  when  the 
proconsul  pressed  this  Phrygian  hard,  and 
had  affrighted  him  by  the  sight  of  the  wild 
beasts,  to  which  he  was  to  be  thrown,  he 
gave  in,  swore  by  the  genius  of  the  em- 
peror, and  offered  sacrifices.  The  Church, 
after  the  narration  of  these  circumstances, 
add  this  remark  :  "  Therefore  we  do  not 
approve  of  those  who  give  themselves  up, 
for  the  Gospel  does  not  instruct  us  to  do 
this."  How  different  was  the  conduct  of 
the  aged  Polycarp  I  when  he  heard  the 
cry  of  the  people  who  were  eager  for  his 
blood,  his  first  impression  was  to  remain 
in  the  town,  and  to  await  God's  pleasure 
in  the  event;  but  the  prayers  of  the 
Church  prevailed  on  him  to  take  refuge 
in  a  neighbouring  country  seat.  Here  he 
remained  in  company  with  some  friends, 
busied  day  and  night,  as  he  was  accus- 
tomed, in  offering  prayers  for  all  commu- 
nities in.  the  whole  world.  When  he  was 
searched  for,  he  betook  himself  to  another 
country  place,  and  he  had  scarcely  gone 
before  tlie  police  appeared,  to  whom  the 
retreat  of  Polycarp  had  been  made  known 
by  some  of  his  confidential  but  unworthy 
friends.  They  found  two  slaves,  one  of 
whom,  under  the  pain  of  torture,  betrayed 
the  place  to  which  the  bishop  had  fled. 
When  they  came,  Polycarp,  who  was  in 
the  upper  story,  might  have  retreated 
from  the  flat  roof  to  another  house,  a  con- 
venience which  the  eastern  mode  of  build- 
ing afforded,  but  he  said,  "-God's  will  be 
done !"  He  came  down  to  the  police- 
officers,  and  ordered  them  as  much  re- 
freshment as  they  might  be  inclined  to 
take,  begging  only  as  a  favour  that  they 
would  allow  him  one  hour's  undisturbed 
prayer.  The  fulness  of  his  heart,  how- 
ever, carried  him  on  for  two  hours,  and 
even  the  heathen  were  touched  at  the 
sight  of  his  devotion. 

When  this  interval  had  passed,  he  was 
conducted  on  an  ass  to  tlie  town,  where 
the  chief  officer  of  police  (tl^nnu^x,"^) 
going  with  his  father  out  of  the  town,  met 
him,  and  taking  him  into  his  carriage, 
spoke  to  him  in  a  kind  and  friendly  man- 
ner :  "  What  harm,"  said  he,  "  can  it  be 
for  you  to  say,  '  oiir  lord  the  emperor.^* 
and  to  offer  up  sacrifices  ?"*     Polycarp 


*  We  may  learn  from  the  words  of  Tertullian, 
Apologet.  c.  34,  what  the  sentiments  of  the  Chris- 
tians about  such  a  demand  were.  "The  name 
Lord  is  also  one  of  the  names  of  God.  I  am 
willing  to-call  the  emperor  lord,  but  in  the  common 
acceptation  of  language,  and  then  I  must  not  be 
compelled  to  call  him  lord  in  the  same  sense  that 
I  call  God  by  this  name.     But  1  am  free  from 


POLYCARP    DIES    ON   THE    FUNERAL   PILE. 


at  first  was  silent,  but  when  they  con- 
tinued to  press  him,  he  cahnly  said,  "  I 
will  not  do  what  you  advise  me."  When 
they  saw  that  they  could  not  persuade 
him,  they  grew  angry.  With  bitter  and 
contumelious  expressions  they  threw  him 
out  of  the  carriage,  and  so  roughly  as  to 
injure  one  of  the  bones  of  his  shin.  He 
turned,  and  went  on  his  way,  as  if 
nothing  had  happened.  When  he  ap- 
peared before  the  proconsul,  the  latter  [ 
said  to  him,  '•'  Swear,  curse  Christ,  and  I  [ 
will  set  you  free .'"  The  old  man  an- 
swered, "•  Eighty  and  six  years  have  I 
served  him,  and  I  have  received  only 
good  at  his  hands !  Can  I  then  curse 
him,  my  King  and  my  Saviour  ?"  When 
the  proconsul  continued  to  press  him, 
Polycarp  said,  "  W' ell,  then,  if  you  desire 
to  know  who  I  am,  I  tell  thee  freely,  / 
am  a  Christian !  if  you  desire  to  know 
Avhat  Christianity  is,  appoint  an  hour  and 
hear  me."  The  proconsul,  who  here 
showed  that  he  did  not  act  from  any  re- 
ligious bigotry,  and  would  gladly  have 
saved  the  old  man,  if  he  could  silence  the 
people,  said  to  Polycarp,  "  Only  persuade 
the  people."  He  replied,  "  To  you  I  felt 
myself  bound  to  render  an  account,  for 
our  religion  teaches  us  to  treat  the  powers 
ordained  by  God  with  becoming  reve- 
rence, as  far  as  is  consistent  with  our 
salvation.  But  as  for  those  without,  I 
consider  them  undeserving  of  any  defence 
from  me."  And  justly  too!  for  what 
would  it  have  been  but  throwing  pearls 
before  swine,  to  attempt  to  speak  of  the 
Gospel  to  a  wild,  tumultuous,  and  fana- 
tical mob  ?  After  the  governor  had  in 
vain  threatened  him  with  wild  beasts  and 
the  funeral  pile,  he  made  the  herald  pub- 
licly announce  in  the  circus,  that  Poly- 
carp had  confessed  himself  a  Christian. 
These  words  contained  the  sentence  of 
death  against  him.  The  people  instantly 
cried  out,  "This  is  the  teacher  of  atheism, 
the  father  of  the  Christians,  the  enemy 
of  our  gods,  who  has  taught  so  many  not 
to  pray  to  the  gods,  and  not  to  sacrifice  !" 
As  soon  as  the  proconsul  had  complied 
with  the  demand  of  the  populace,  that 
Polycarp  should  perish  on  the  funeral 
pile,  Jew  and  Gentile  hastened  with  the 
utmost  eagerness  to  collect  wood  from 
the  market-places  and  the  baths.     When 


him.  I  have  one  Lord,  the  almighty  and  eternal 
God,  who  is  the  Lord  also  of  the  emperor." 
What  a  contrast  between  the  free  spirit  of  this 
Christian  and  the  slavish  adulation  of  a  Komari 
senate  since  the  time  of  Augustus !  Truly,  in- 
deed, it  is  the  Son  of  God  who  sets  us  free ! 
9 


65 

they  wished  to  fasten  him  with  nails 
to  the  pile,  the  old  man  said,  "Leave  me 
thus,  I  pray,  unfastened ;  He,  who  has 
enabled  me  to  abide  the  fire,  will  give  me 
strength  also  to  remain  firm  on  the  stake." 
Before  the  fire  was  lighted  he  prayed 
thus  :  "  O  Lord  !  Almighty  God  !  the 
Father  of  thy  beloved  Son  Jesus  Christ ; 
through  whom  we  have  received  a  know- 
ledge of  Thee  !  God  of  the  angels  and  of 
the  whole  creation,  of  the  whole  human 
race,  and  of  the  saints,  who  live  before 
thy  presence  !  I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast 
thought  me  worthy,  this  day,  and  this 
hour,  to  share  the  cup  of  thy  Chris-t 
among  the  number  of  thy  witnesses  !" 

The  Church  recognised,  in  the  example 
of  their  bishop,  what  tlie  nature  of  a 
genuine  evangelical  mart\Tdom  should 
be  : — "  for,"  they  write,  ^  he  waited  to  be 
given  up  (he  did  not  press  forward  un- 
called to  a  martyr's  death,)  as  also  did 
our  Lord,  that  we  might  therein  follow 
him ;  so  that  we  should  not  look  to  that 
which  concerns  our  own  salvation  alone, 
but  also  to  that  which  is  requisite  for  our 
neighbour :  for  this  is  the  nature  of  true 
and  genuine  charity — to  seek,  not  only 
our  own  salvation,  but  that  of  all  the 
brethren." 

The  death  of  the  pious  pastor  was  a 
source  of  temporal  advantage  to  his 
Church.  The  fury  of  the  populace  having 
obtained  this  victim,  cooled  a  little, — and 
the  proconsul,  who  was  not  a  personal 
enemy  of  the  Christians,  suspended  all 
inquisition,  and  was  willing  to  be  igno- 
rant of  the  existence  of  any  Christians 
around  him. 

The  second  persecution  under  this  em- 
peror, of  which  we  have  any  accounts, 
took  place  among  the  churches  of  Lyons 
(Lugdunum)  and  Vienne,  A.  D.  177.  The 
fanatical  rage  of  the  people  in  these  cities 
resembled,  if  it  did  not  exceed,  that  of 
the  people  of  Smyrna;  and  there  was 
here  also  the  additional  circumstance,  that 
the  superior  oOicers  of  government  were 
infected  with  this  fury.  The  outbreak- 
ings  of  the  rage  of  tlie  people  appeared 
gradually  to  increase  in  violence,  and  the 
Christians  were  reviled  and  ill-treated 
whenever  they  appeared  in  public,  and 
were  plundered  in  their  houses.  At 
length  the  best  known  were  seized,  and 
brought  before  the  government.  VVhen 
they  declared  themselves  Christians,  they 
were  thrown  into  prison,  as  they  could 
not  be  tried  inmiediately,  in  consequence 
of  the  absence  of  the  governor,  that  is  to 
say,  the  legatus,  or  lieutenant.  On  his 
f2 


66 


CONDUCT    OP   THE    GOVERNOR   TO    THE    CHRISTIANS. 


return,  he  instantly  began  an  inquisition, 
accompanied  by  the  use  of  tortures,  not 
only  to  force  the  Christians  to  a  recanta- 
tion, but  also  to  wring  from  them  an 
avowal  of  the  truth  with  regard  to  the 
horrible  accusations  of  unnatural  prac- 
tices, which  were  commonly  reported 
against  them.  In  Smyrna  the  proconsul 
seems  to  have  been  too  sensible  to  lend 
his  ear  to  such  reports.  A  young  man 
of  some  rank,  by  name  Bettius  Pagatus, 
although  not  arrested  as  a  Christian,  felt 
himself  bound,  on  hearing  of  these  accu- 
sations, to  come  forward  in  attestation  of 
the  innocence  of  his  brethren.  He  asked 
a  hearing,  in  which  he  promised  to  show 
that  nothing  criminal  took  place  at  the 
meetings  of  the  Christians  ;  but  the  legate, 
without  giving  hun  a  hearing,  only  asked 
if  he  were  a  Christian,  and  on  his  clear 
declaration  of  this,  he  was  cast  into  prison 
as  the  advocate  of  the  Christians  (Tra^axA*!- 
Tor  ^^KT-Tioctuv.)  Some  heathen  slaves, 
under  fear  of  the  torture,  declared  their 
Christian  masters  guilty  of  the  crimes 
which  vague  rumours  laid  to  their  charge. 
Little  as  such  a  declaration  was  worth, 
fanaticism  was  eager  to  receive  it  as  an 
evidence  of  truth,  and  the  people  felt  that ' 
every  cruelty  was  now  justifiable.  Neither 
kindred,  age,  nor  sex  were  spared.  The 
steadfastness  and  tranquillity  of  many  of 
these  Christians  under  the  most  exquisite 
tortures,  showed  plainly,  to  use  the  words 
of  the  account  given  by  the  Church, 
"  how  they  were  bedewed  and  strengthened 
by  the  waters  of  life,  which  flow  forth 
from  the  heart  of  Christ,  and  that  nothing 
is  terrible  where  the  love  of  God  exists, 
nor  painful,  where  the  glory  of  Christ 
dwells."  Pothinus,  the  bishop  of  the 
community  of  Lyons,  a  man  of  ninety 
years  of  age,  weak  from  infirmity  and 
sickness,  but  filled  with  youthful  vigour 
from  his  zeal  to  give  testimony  to  the 
truth,  was  dragged  before  the  tribunal. 
The  legate  asked  him,  "  Who  is  the  God 
of  the  Christians  ?"  and  received  the  an- 
swer which  such  an  inquirer  deserved — 
"You  will  know  him  if  you  prove  your- 
self worthy  of  such  knowledge."  All 
who  stood  around  the  tribunal,  were  now 
eager  to  pour  out  their  wrath  upon  the 
venerable  old  man.  Half  breathless  he 
was  cast  into  prison,  where  he  died  in 
two  days.  It  was  of  no  use  now  to  yield 
and  recant;  those  who  did  were  thrown 
into  prison,  not  as  Christians,  but  as  being 
guilty  of  the  crimes  which  were  laid  to 
the  charge  of  Christians — an  accusation 
which  probably   was  supported  on  the 


strength  of  such  crimes  having  been  some- 
times confessed  in  the  agonies  of  torture. 
Many  died  in  a  dark  dungeon,  the  terrors 
of  which  many  inventions  were  contrived 
to  augment,  while  the  wretched  prisoner 
was  condemned  to  endure  the  extremities 
of  hunger  and  thirst ;  on  the  other  hand, 
to  use  the  expressions  of  the  Church, 
"  Many  who  suffered  such  severe  tor- 
ments, that  it  would  have  seemed  impos- 
sible for  the  greatest  care  to  enable  them 
to  survive,  lived  on  in  the  dungeon,  de- 
serted by  human  care,  but  so  strengthened 
in  body  and  soul  by  the  Lord,  that  they 
were  able  to  inspirit  and  comfort  their 
comrades."  It  happened  "  by  the  grace 
of  God,  who  wills  not  the  death  of  a  sin- 
ner, but  delights  in  his  repentance,"  that 
the  persuasions  of  these  heroes  of  the 
faith  wrought  deeply  on  many  of  those, 
who  had  yielded  and  denied  their  faith, 
and  "  their  Mother  the  Church  had  the 
great  joy  of  receiving  again  out  of  the 
prison  as  living  members,  those  whom 
she  had  cut  off  as  dead." 

As  the  number  of  the  prisoners  was 
considerable,  and  there  were  among  them 
Roman  citizens  who  could  not  be  tried  in 
the  province,  the  legate  thought  it  best, 
in  regard  to  all  of  them,  to  send  his  re- 
port to  Rome,  and  await  the  emperor's 
decision.  The  imperial  rescript  was  to 
this  effect,  '•  that  those  who  recanted 
should  be  set  free,  and  the  rest  beheaded." 
It  is  evident  here,  that  Marcus  Aurelius 
thought  on  this  matter  with  Trajan,  and 
was  far  from  giving  credit  to  the  accusa- 
tions against  Christians.  The  legate  first 
cited  before  his  tribunal  all  those,  who 
had  been  prevailed  on  to  recant  during 
the  first  inquisition,  and  were  awaiting  in 
the  dungeon  the  decision  of  their  fate. 
It  was,  of  course,  fully  expected  that  they 
would  repeat  tlieir  denial  of  the  faith,  and 
so  obtain  their  freedom  ;  but  the  indigna- 
tion and  astonishment  of  the  multitude 
can  scarcely  be  conceived,  when  many 
among  them  uttered  a  steadfast  confession 
of  their  faith,  and  by  so  doing  signed 
their  own  death  warrant.  Tliose  alone, 
says  the  Church,  remained  apart  from  us, 
who  retained  no  vestige  of  their  faith,  nor 
had  ever  put  on  tiie  wedding-garment  of 
the  Lord,  (that  feeling  of  faith  working 
througli  love  by  which  communion  with 
God  is  made  known,)  and  such  only  as 
had  no  fear  of  God,  and  had  already  scan- 
dalized their  religion  by  their  conduct. 
Tlie  legate  executed  those  among  the  pri- 
soners who  had  the  rigiUs  of  Roman  citi- 
zens by  the  sword,  although  he  caused 


HUMILITY    OF   THE    MARTYRS    AT   LYONS. 


67 


Attalus,  one  of  the  number,  in  violation 
of  the  hwvs,  to  be  tortured  in  various  ways, 
and  then  thrown  to  wild  beasts,  merely 
to  gratify  tlie  violence  of  the  people  ;  and 
when  Attalus  had  endured  all  the  punish- 
ments, he  allowed  the  death-blow  to  be 
inflicted  with  the  sword.  The  rest  were 
thrown  to  wild  beasts.  Two  of  the  con- 
verts, Ponticus,  a  stripling  of  fifteen,  and 
a  girl  named  Blandina,  whom  they  endea- 
voured to  frighten  by  making  them  wit- 
ness all  the  severest  sufferings  of  their 
companions,  excited  only  general  aston- 
ishment, at  what  the  power  of  God  could 
effect  in  such  weak  and  tender  vessels. 
We  allow  that  these  effects  do  not  always 
proceed  from  the  Spirit  of  God  \  most 
extraordinary  effects,  we  know  from  his- 
tory, are  often  produced  by  the  power  of 
the  human  will,  animated  by  the  feverish 
intoxication  of  enthusiasm,  which  is  ca- 
pable of  extinguishing  so  many  of  the 
tender  weaknesses  of  human  nature.  But 
haughtiness  and  pride  usually  accompany 
enthusiasm,  while  that  which  proceeds 
from  the  Spirit  of  God  is  distinguished  by 
humility  and  love,  and  it  was  this  sign 
which  marked  the  martyrs  of  Lyons,  as 
disciples  of  Jesus  Christ.  When  their  fel- 
low Christians  eagerly  sought  to  show 
honour  to  such  heroes  of  the  faith,  they 
refused  it.  Even  when  they  had  been 
conducted  back  to  prison,  after  enduring 
repeated  tortures,  they  did  not,  when  they 
looked  only  to  themselves,  feel  sure  of 
the  victory.  As  they  were  no  deluded 
enthusiasts,  they  felt  strongly  the  strug- 
gle between  the  flesh  and  the  spirit ;  and 
they  most  decidedly  blamed  those  who 
honoured  them  with  the  name  of  "  mar- 
tyrs." "This  name,"  they  said,  "be- 
longs properly  only  to  the  true  and  righte- 
ous Witness,*  the  First-born  of  the  dead, 
the  Prince  of  life ;  or,  at  least  only  to 
those  martyrs  whose  witness  to  the  truth 
Christ  has  already  sealed  by  their  death 
in  the  faith.  We  are  merely  poor  and 
humble  confessors  of  the  faith."  With 
tears  they  implored  the  brethren  fervently 
to  pray  for  them,  that  they  might  bring 
their  work  to  a  glorious  conclusion. 
With  tender  love  they  received  those  of 
their  companions,  wlio  had  fallen  away 
from  the  faith  and  were  sent  into  their 
prison,  and  prayed  to  God  with  many 
tears,  that  Ho  would  restore  these  dead 
to  life.  Tliev  looked  even  on  their  per- 
secutors without  one  feeling  of  revenge, 
and  only  prayed  to  God  that  He  would 


forgive  those  who  had  inflicted  the  most 
cruel  tortures  upon  them.  To  the  breth- 
ren they  left  behind  them,  not  contention 
and  wrath,  but  peace  and  joy,  harmony 
and  love. 

The  rage  of  the  populace  was  satisfied 
with  the  mutilation  of  the  body  and  its 
consumption  on  the  funeral  pile,  but  even 
then  the  ashes  and  the  miserable  remains 
that  escaped  the  fire,  were  thrown  into 
the  waters  of  the  neighbouring  Rhone, 
that  no  remnant  of  these  enemies  of  the 
gods  might  pollute  the  earth.  Neither 
tears  nor  money  were  availing  to  the 
Christians,  to  procure  the  remains  of  mar- 
tyrs so  dear  to  them,  for  interment.  The 
ignorant  and  blinded  heathen  thought  they 
should  thus  bring  the  hope  of  Christians 
to  confusion.  "  We  shall  now  see,"  said 
they,  "  whether  they  will  rise  again,  and 
whether  God  can  help  them,  and  save 
them  from  our  hands."  At  length,  how- 
ever, as  the  Christians  were  so  numer- 
ous, men  became  weary  of  bloodshed, 
and  there  still  remained  a  branch  of  the 
Church  even  under  this  bitter  persecu- 
tion. 

In  places  where  only  a  few  Christians 
dwelt,  their  existence  was  more  easily 
concealed,  and  the  rage  of  the  people  was 
not  so  easily  attracted  to  them.  The  gov- 
ernors did  not  think  it  necessary  to  es- 
tablish a  search  for  them,  except  where 
individuals,  from  peculiar  circumstances, 
made  themselves  notorious  as  enemies  of 
the  slate  religion,  which  happened  about 
this  time  in  a  town  not  very  far  from 
Lyons,  called  Autnn.*  There  was  no  in- 
tention of  persecuting  the  Christians  there, 
as  they  were  in  small  numbers,  and  but 
little  known,  when  a  Christian  first  at- 
tracted public  notice  to  himself.  The 
noisy  multitude,  with  great  solemnities, 
were  celebrating  a  festival  in  honour  of 
Cybele,  whose  worship  appears  to  have 
come  hither  from  Asia  Minor,  by  the  same 
route  which  Christianity  afterwards  fol- 
lowed, and  she  appears  also  to  have  been 
held  in  great  respect  at  that  time.  An 
image  of  Cybele  was  carried  round  in  one 
of  her  usual  cars,  and  accompanied  by  a 
great  multitude  of  people.  All  fell  on 
their  knees;  but  Symphorianus,  a  young 
man  of  high  family,  conceived  that  his 
conscience  would  not  allow  him  to  par- 
ticipate in  this  rite,  and  most  probably 
on  being  taken  to  task  for  it,  took  occa- 
sion to  speak  of  the  vanity  of  idolatry 
He  was  instantly  seized,  and  conductec: 


Ma^Ti/g.  Rev.  i.  fi. 


Aagustodunum,  .ifJdua. 


68 


THE    LEGIO    FULMINEA,   A.  D.    174. 


before  the  governor,  Heraclius,  a  man  of  \ 
consular  dignity,  as  a  disturber  of  the  pub- 
lic worship,  and  a  seditious  citizen.  The 
governor  said  to  him,  "  You  are  a  Chris- 
tian, I  suppose.  As  far  as  I  can  judge, 
you  must  have  escaped  our  notice^  for 
there  are  but  a  few  followers  of  this  sect 
here.''''  He  answered,  "  I  am  a  Christian ; 
I  pray  to  the  true  God,  who  rules  in  hea- 
ven, but  I  cannot  pray  to  idols ;  nay,  if  I 
were  permitted,  I  would  dash  them  to 
atoms,  on  my  own  responsibility."  The 
governor,  on  this  avowal,  declared  him 
guilty  of  a  double  crime,  one  crime  against 
the  religion,  and  another  against  the  laws 
of  the  state ;  and,  as  neither  threats  nor 
promises  could  induce  Symphorianus  to 
abjure  his  faith,  he  was  sentenced  to  be 
beheaded.  As  they  led  him  to  execution, 
his  mother  cried  out  to  him,  "  My  son,  my 
son,  keep  the  living  God  in  thy  heart ; 
we  cannot  fear  death,  which  leads  so  cer- 
tainly to  life ;  up,  my  son !  let  thy  heart 
be  up.  and  look  to  him  who  rules  on  high. 
Thy  life  is  not  taken  from  thee  to-day, 
but  thou  art  conducted  to  a  better.  By  a 
blessed  exchange,  my  son,  thou  will  pass 
this  day  to  the  life  of  heaven."* 

If  we  may  credit  a  report  which  has 
been  current  among  Christians  from  the 
beginning  of  the  third  century,  the  emperor 
Marcus  Aurelius  was  induced  to  adopt 
a  different  conduct  towards  them  by  an 
event  of  a  miraculous  nature.  During  the 
war  against  the  Marcomanni  and  the 
Quaddi,  A.  D.  174,  his  army  was  reduced 
to  great  distress  ;  a  burning  sun  lay  upon 
it  in  front,  and  it  was  then  suffering  the 
extremities  of  thirst  from  a  drought,  and 
expecting  every  instant  in  this  unfavour- 
able condition  an  attack  of  the  enemy. 
In  this  extremity  the  twelfth  legion, 
which  consisted  entirely  of  Christians, 
fell  upon  their  knees.  At  their  prayer  a 
rain  descended,  which  quenched  the  thirst 
of  the  Roman  soldiers,  and  a  storm  arose 
which  frightened  the  barbarians.  The 
Roman  army  gained  the  victory,  and  in 
commemoration  of  this  event  the  emperor 
gave  the  legion  the  name  of  Legio  Fulmi- 
nea.     lie  ceased  to  persecute  the  Chris- 


tians ,  and  although  he  did  not  go  so  far 
as  to  receive  their  religion  into  the  class 
of  "  religiones  licitse,"  he  published  an 
edict  inflicting  heavy  penalties  on  those 
who  accused  Christians  merely  on  the 
score  of  their  religion.*  Truth  and 
falsehood  are  blended  together  in  this 
narration.  The  emperor  cannot  have 
been  induced  to  suspend  his  persecution 
of  the  Christians  by  any  event  of  this 
date,  for  the  persecution  of  Lyons  took 
place  three  years  later.  The  twelfth 
legion  also  had  borne  this  name  ever 
since  the  time  of  Augustus  Caesar .|  The 
fact,  that  the  Roman  army  Avas  at  that 
time  saved  from  imminent  danger  by  some 
such  remarkable  occurrence,  is  undeni- 
able ;  and  even  the  heathen  acknowledged 
in  it  the  hand  of  God.  They  ascribed  it, 
however,  not  to  the  God  of  the  Chris- 
tians, nor  to  their  prayers,  but  to  their 
own  gods,  to  their  Jupiter,  and  to  the 
prayers  of  the  emperor  or  the  army ;  not 
to  mention  a  foolish  superstition,  which 
attributes  the  descent  of  the  storm  to  the 
incantations  of  an  Egyptian  magician.J  It 
is  said  that  the  prince  prayed  to  Jupiter, 
stretching  out  his  hands  towards  heaven, 
and  saying,  "This  hand,  which  never  yet 
shed  human  blood  (for  I  reckon  not  the 
blood  of  the  enemies  of  the  gods,)  I 
stretch  forth  to  thee!"  There  were  pic- 
tures where  he  was  represented  praying, 
and  the  soldiers  catching  the  rain  in  their 
helmets.§  The  emperor  himself  expresses 
this  belief  in  a  coin,  -where  Jupiter  is 
represented  as  hurling  down  his  lightning 
on  fhe  barbarians  stretched  upon  the 
ground  ;||  and  perhaps,  also,  in  his  medi- 
tations at  the  end  of  the  first  book,  where 
among  the  things  for  which  he  has  to 
thank,  not  himself,  but  the  gods,  he 
names,  in  the  last  place,  the  occurrences 
among  the  Quadi.lT     It  is  also  quite  cer- 


*  The  relation  of  the  martyrdom  of  Sympho- 
rianus is  so  simple  in  essentials,  so  lilflc  deformed 
by  the  customary  exaggerations  of  later  days,  and 
so  suitable  to  Ihe  circumstances  of  the  times,  that 
■we  cannot  doubt  that  it  is  entirely  founded  on 
facts,  although,  perhaps,  in  some  passages  it  may 
lie  laboured  and  rhetorical.  Every  thing,  how- 
ever, conspires  to  prove  that  the  event  itself  took 
place  at  a  time  not  far  distant  from  that  of  the 
persecution  at  Lyons  and  Vienne. 


*  Tertullian,  Apologet.  c.  v. ;  and  ad  Scapulam . 
c.  iv.     Euseb.Lib.  v.  c.  5. 

-j-  Dio  Cassius,  in  his  table  of  the  FiCgions  ex- 
isting in  the  time  of  the  emperor  Augustus,  B.  Iv. 
ch.  23  :  TO  MeuttTov  (irTgaTCTrscfov)  ro  h  K^ttttuJouu, 
ro  it^a.uv:<p'j^cv.  Also,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  in 
the  "notitia  dignitatum  Imperii  Romanii,"  §  27, 
the  "prffifectura  legionis  diiodccima;  fulminea;  Me- 
litena;"  is  assigned  to  the  Dux  Armenia; ;  the  pro- 
vince of  Melitena  lying  on  the  borders  of  Armenia 
and  Cappadocia. 

+  Dio  Cass.  Lib.  Ixxi.  p.  8. 

§  Themist.  Orat.  15,  t«  »  /3«!rM«!i)TaT»  Tcev 
ligM-aiii,  p.  191,  ed.  Hardouin. 

II   fSee  Eckhel  Numism.  B.  iii.  64. 

1  Ta  iv  Kcu^o/c  'rpo;  tm  y^u.vcv^.  It  has  here 
been  supposed,  that  M.  Aurelius  indicates  by  these 
words  the  place  in  which  he  wrote  this  book ;  but 


PEACE  FOR  THE  CHRISTIANS  UNDER  COMMODUS. 


tain,  that  this  remarkable  event  can  have 
had  no  influence  on  the  emperor's  senti- 
ments towards  the  Christians  :  but,  at  the 
same  time,  we  have  no  right,  on  this  ac- 
count, to  accuse  the  latter  of  a  fiction. 
The  thing  is  very  easily  explained ;  there 
may  have  been  many  Christians  in  the 
Legio  Fulminea,  for  it  is  quite  certain  that 
only  a  part  of  the  Christians  condemned 
the  profession  of  a  soldier,  and  even 
though  it  may  be  difficxdt  to  imagine  that 
the  Christians  generally  (and  especially 
under  such  an  emperor  as  Marcus  Aure- 
lius)  could  withdraw  themselves  in  the 
Roman  army  from  participation  in  heathen 
ceremonies,  yet,  under  peculiar  circum- 
stances, this  may  have  been  the  case. 
The  Christian  soldiers,  under  the  pressure 
of  this  distress,  took  refuge,  as  they  were 
accustomed  to  do,  in  prayer  ;  they  looked 
upon  their  deliverance  as  the  answering 
of  their  prayers,  and  on  their  return  home 
told  their  story  to  their  fellow-believers. 
Tiiese  naturally  would  not  iail  to  remind 
the  heathen  of  what  they  owed  to  the 
Christians  whom  they  so  persecuted. 
Claudius  Apollinaris,  bishop  of  Hierapolis, 
in  Phrygia,  might  have  heard  it  soon 
after  the  event  from  the  mouths  of  the 
soldiers  themselves  of  this  legion,  which 
returned  to  winter-quarters  in  Cappado- 
cia,  and  he  made  use  of  it  in  an  apology, 
which  he  addressed  to  this  emperor,  or  in 
his  other  apologetic  works.*  As  to  the 
letter,  to  which  TertuUian  appeals,  from 
Marcus  Aurelius,  apparently  addressed  to 
the  Roman  senate,  in  which  he  ascribes 
this  deliverance  to  the  Christian  soldiers, 
if  the  words  are  accurately  quoted,  the 
above  remarks  will  prove  that  the  letter 
must  be  a  forgery.  The  inquiry,  how- 
ever, is  still  open,  whether  the  words  are 
accurately  cited,  or  whether  the  emperor 
using  the  word  "  soldiers"  simply,  Ter- 
tuUian,  putting   his    own    interpretation 


69 

'  upon  it,  makes  him  speak  of  Chrislian 
I  soldiers.  At  all  events.  TertuUian  ex- 
presses himself  doubtfully.*  Another 
relation  of  this  same  event  by  TertuUian, 
will  plainly  show  us  how  the  Christians 
explained  the  religious  deliverances  of 
I  the  heathen  from  their  own  belief,  and 
not  witliout  reason — for  they  well  knew 
icho  the  unknown  God  was,  whom  the 
j  heathen  worshipped  under  the  name  of 
Jupiter.  These  are  his  words:  "-Mar- 
I  cus  Aurelius  also,  in  the  German  expedi- 
j  tion,  received  rain  after  a  drought  at  the 
i  prayers  of  a  Christian  soldiery.  How 
often  have  the  droughts  of  countries  been 
removed  by  our  kneelingf  and  fasting! 
In  such  cases,  even  the  people  gave  our 
:God  the  honour;  for  they  cried  out  to 
j  the  God  of  Gods,  the  only  mighty  one, 
j  under  the  name  of  Jupiter.";}; 

There  is  the  less  reason  to  look  for 
i  any  definite  cause  for  the  cessation  of  the 
'  persecutions,  because  rage  naturally  in 
[time  expends  itself;  and  besides,  in  this 
case,  only  a  few  years  after  the  last 
bloody  persecution  in  France,  every  thing 
at  Rome  was  changed  with  the  change  in 
the  government.  The  insignificance  of 
the  abandoned  Commodus,  who  succeeded 
his  father  in  the  year  180,  litde  as  he  can 
have  cared  for  Christianity,  must  have 
been  of  advantage  to  the  Christians  in 
procuring  for  them  a  time  of  refreshment 
and  repose  after  their  sufferings  under 
Marcus  Aurelius.  Marcia,  who  lived  in 
illicit  commerce  with  Commodus,  was, 
we  know  not  how,  a  friend  to  the  Chris- 
tians, and  influenced  the  emperor  in  their 


as  such  an  addition  is  only  found  in  the  third  book, 
we  may,  perhaps,  more  aptly  interpret  these 
words  as  an  allusion  to  some  events  in  certain 
places,  the  mention  of  which  has  some  connection 
with  what  goes  before. 

•  We  must  avow,  that  where  Eusebius  makes 
Apollinaris  say,  that  the  legion  received  the  name 
of  "  fulminea"  from  this  event,  there  is  reason  to 
suspect  that  he  read  his  account  in  great  haste,  for 
it  is  difficult  to  think  that  so  gross  a  blunder  could 
have  been  made  by  a  contemporary,  living  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  wintcr-(juarters  of  that  legion. 
Perhaps  Apollinaris  only  says,  that  the  emperor 
might  now,  with  justice,  call  the  legion  "  fulmi- 
nea," or  something  of  this  sort.  [Is  not  the  dis- 
tance of  Cappadocia  from  the  Quadi  an  objection 
to  that  part  of  Dr.  Neander's  explanation,  which 
speaks  of  "  winter-quarters  1" — H.  J.  R.] 


*   Christianorum  forte  militum. 

t  Days  of  prayer  and  fasting,  commonly  joined 
together  by  the  Christians. 

t  [Those  who  are  desirous  of  further  informa- 
tion on  the  subject  of  the  Legio  Fulminea,  will  do 
well  to  consult  the  remarks  made  on  the  early 
miracles  by  the  bishop  of  London,  in  the  notes  to 
the  volume  of  Sermons  which  he  has  lately  pub- 
lished. See  also  Mosheim,  cent.  ii.  part  1,  §  1U. 
Jortin  is  fii|)pant  on  the  subject,  as  usu:d,  and  Gib- 
bon sneers  at  the  Christians,  as  usual  also;  but  in 
all  the  writers  whom  I  have  consulted,  I  find  that 
the  conclusion  is  nearly  similar  to  that  drawn  by 
Neandcr,  which  seems  indeed  to  be  the  only 
reasonable  one.  They  all  admit  tlie  fact  to  be 
undeniable,  but  they  mostly  deny  that  any  nura- 
culous  interposition  is  due  to  the  prayers  of  the 
Christians.  Why,  however,  the  account  of  the 
Christians  is  not  at  least  as  credible  as  that  of  the 
heathen,  who  attribute  a  miracle  to  Jupiter,  Mr. 
Gibbon  leaves  us  to  make  out  for  ourselves.  See 
also  the  works  of  Mr.  Moylc,  where  this  question 
is  discussed  in  a  very  elaborate  manner.  Moyle's 
Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  81 — 390.  Mr.  Moyle,  however, 
does  not  admit  some  of  the  facts  assumed  by  the 
explanation  of  Dr.  JMeander.—H.  J.  R.] 


NO  NEW  LAW  FAVOURABLE  TO  THE  CHRISTIANS. 


70 


favour.  The  law  which  we  cited  above 
from  TertuUian,  as  favourable  to  the 
Christians,  may  have  proceeded  from  this 
emperor,  who  was  well  inclined  to  them, 
and  have  been  falsely  attributed  to  the 
latter  years  of  his  predecessor.  There 
were  really  events  in  the  reign  of  Com- 
modus,  in  which  the  working  of  such  a 
law  has  been  supposed  visible.  One  is, 
however,  led  to  inquire  whether  the  con- 
clusion as  to  the  existence  of  the  law 
from  these  events  is  not  a  hasty  one,  and 
whether  it  does  not  proceed  from  a  mis- 
take. It  certainly  does  appear  in  the 
highest  degree  improbable,  that  accusa- 
tions against  the  Christians  should  have 
been  received  just  as  before,  the  Chris- 
tians sentenced  to  death  by  Trajan's  law, 
and  yet  their  accusers,  at  the  same  time, 
have  been  capitally  punished !  An  ex- 
ample will,  perhaps,  clearly  illustrate  this. 
ApoUonius,  a  Roman  senator,  having 
been  accused  before  the  Pra)fectus  urbis 
as  a  Christian,  his  accuser  was  instantly 
sentenced  to  death,  and  executed ;  but 
ApoUonius  himself,  liaving  most  courage- 
ously avowed  his  faith  before  the  senate, 
Avas  also  beheaded  by  a  decree  of  that 
body.  This  is  the  tale  :  but  Jerome,  who 
can  hardly  have  mistaken  the  words  of 
Eusebius,  and  is  likely  to  have  a  more 
accurate  knowledge  on  the  matter,  says, 
that  this  accuser  was  the  slave  of  ApoUo- 
nius, and  that  this  is  proved  by  the  igno- 
minious punishment  which  he  suffered, 
his  legs  being  broken  previous  to  his 
execution  (suflVingi  cura.)  He  was,  there- 
fore, executed,  not  as  an  accuser  of  a 
Christian,  but  as  a  slave  who  was  faith- 
less to  his  master.  From  hasty  conclu- 
sions on  such  circumstances,  it  is  possible 
that  the  story  of  a  law  favourable  to 
Christianity  may  have  derived  its  origin. 
As,  therefore,  this  emperor  most  probably 
did  not  alter  the  condition  of  Christians 
by  any  express  edict,  as  the  law  of  Trajan 
had  never  been  expressly  repealed,  and 
as  all  depended  entirely  on  the  change  in 
the  emperor's  sentiments,  the  situation  of 
Christians  must  then  have  been  very  pre- 
carious. They  were  constantly  exposed 
to  persecution  from  any  governor,  who 
might  individually  be  hostile  to  Chris- 
tianity. Thus  the  proconsul  of  Asia 
Minor,  Arrius  Antoninus,  began  a  perse- 
cution, but  a  great  multitude  of  Christians 
from  the  town  in  which  the  persecution 
began,  flocked  to  the  tribunal  in  order  to 
deter  the  proconsul  from  this  measure  by 
tlicir  numbers,  a  consunmiation  they  might 
fairly  hope  for  under  a  government  where 


the  persecutirm  proceeded  from  indivi- 
duals, and  not  from  the  imperial  throne. 
The  proconsul  was  really  frightened,  and 
contenting  himself  with  sentencing  a  few 
to  death,  he  said  to  the  rest,  "  As  for  you, 
miserable  creatures  !  if  you  choose  to  die, 
you  have  rocks  to  dash  yourselves  from, 
and  ropes  to  hang  yourselves  with  !"* 
Irena^us,  who  wrote  during  this  reign, 
says  that  the  Christians  frequented  the 
imperial  court,  and  that  they  were  par- 
takers in  all  the  usual  advantages  of  the 
Roman  empire,  that  they  might  go  by 
land  and  by  sea  wherever  they  were  in- 
clined ;'[  and  yet  this  same  Irenajus  also 
affirms  that  the  church  at  all  times,  from 
which  he  does  not  except  those  in  which 
he  wrote,  was  constantly  sending  many 
martyrs  to  the  Father  in  heaven.J  This 
apparent  contradiction  is  easily  solved  by 
the  above  remarks  on  the  nature  of  the 
persecutions  in  this  reign. 

The  political  storms  which  followed 
the  murder  of  Commodus,  A.  D.  192 ;  the 
civil  war  between  Fescennius  Niger  from 
the  east,  Clodius  Albinus  from  Gaul,  and 
Septimius  Severus,  which  ended  in  the 
sovereignty  of  the  latter,  like  all  other 
public  calamities,  could  not  be  favourable 
to  the  Christians.  In  these  political  con- 
vulsions the  fury  of  the  populace,  or  the 
malice  of  individual  governors,  had  many 
opportunities  of  wreaking  vengeance  on 
the  Christians.  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
who  wrote  shortly  after  the  death  of 
Commodus,  says,  "  We  see  daily  many 
martyrs  burnt,  crucified,  and  beheaded 
before  our  eyes."§  When  Septimius  Se- 
verus had  obtained  the  victory,  and  found 
himself  in  secure  possession  of  the  em- 
pire, he  showed  himself  favourable  to- 
wards the  Christians,  and  it  is  very  pos- 
sible that  this  disposition  may  have  arisen 
from  the  circumstance  to  which  TertuUian 
attributes  it,  viz.  that  Proculus,  a  Christian 
slave,  had  cured  him  of  an  illness ;  and 
that  he  took  Proculus  to  the  palace,  and 


*  We  are  acquainted  with  two  proconsuls  of 
Asia  Minor  of  this  name  in  the  second  century, 
Antoninus  Pius,  who  was  afterwards  emperor,  and 
his  fp-andfather,  as  well  as  a  third  during  the  reiga 
of  Commodus.  J31.  Lampridii  Vit^-e  Commodi,  c. 
vi.  and  vii.  We  are  naturally  inclined  to  suppose 
it  the  contemporary  of  TertuUian,  for  otherwise  he 
would  give  one  to  understand  that  he  was  speak- 
ing of  an  older  one.  We  learn  from  Lampridius, 
that  this  proconsul  was  in  great  favour  with  the 
people.  It  was,  perhaps,  to  court  popular  applause 
that  he  persecuted  the  Christians. 

-(-  Lib.  iv.  c.  Ilaeres.  c.  30. 

4:  Lib.  iv.  c.  33,  v.  9. 

§  Lib.  ii.  Stromat.  p.  414. 


PERSECUTIONS    UNDER    SEPTIMUS    SEVERUS. 


71 


always  kept  him  near  him.  He  knew 
that  men  and  women  of  the  highest  rank 
in  Rome,  senators  and  tlie  wives  of  sena- 
tors, were  Christians,  and  he  protected 
them  against  popular  fury.  As,  however, 
tlie  old  laws  had  never  been  repealed, 
severe  persecutions  might  take  place  in 
particular  districts — as  for  example  in 
proconsular  Africa — as  we  may  see  in 
many  of  the  works  of  Tertullian,  written 
during  this  very  period.  The  festivals  in 
honour  of  the  emperor,  at  which  the 
Christians  attracted  attention  by  with- 
drawing from  them  (see  above,)  gave  an 
opportunity  for  these  persecutions.  There 
was  besides  a  law  enacted  by  this  em- 
peror, A.  D.  202,  in  which  conversion  to 
Christianity,  as  well  as  to  Judaism,  was 
forbidden  under  heavy  penalties  ;  but  then 
this  law  presupposed  that  the  old  laws 
against  Christianity  had  now  generally 
fallen  much  iuto  disuse.  Inasmuch  as 
this  law,  it  is  probable,  opposed  only  the 
further  extension  of  Christianity,  and  in- 
asmuch as  it  does  not  expressly  condemn 
all  Christians  as  such,  it  implies  some 
relaxation  of  the  older  laws.  And  yet, 
coming  from  an  emperor  who  had  hitherto 
shown  himself  personally  favourable  to 
the  Christians,  this  distinct  declaration 
must  have  excited  the  spirit  of  persecution 
still  more  against  them.  In  many  places* 
the  persecutions  were  so  sore,  that  they 
were  believed  a  token  of  the  speedy  ap- 
pearance of  Antichrist.  In  Egypt  and  in 
proconsular  Africa,  this  was  especially  the 
case,  but  these  persecutions  were  certainly 
not  general.  It  happened  now  in  several 
districts  that  many  Christians  and  Chris- 
tian Churches  purchased  for  themselves, 
from  the  higher  state-officers,  permission 
for  the  free  exercise  of  their  religion,  and 
for  holding  their  assemblies.  But  this 
measure  did  not  give  universal  satisfac- 
tion; in  some  cases  the  Christians  thought 
it  derogatory  to  the  honour  of  their  name, 
and  in  others  it  only  served  to  excite  the 
cupidity  of  avaricious  officers,  and  to  in- 
duce them  to  begin  new  persecutions  for 
the  sake  of  extorting  money.f  The 
Christians  continued  in  this  condition 
throughout  the  reign  of  the  capricious 
Caracalla ;  although  cruel  as  he  was,  he 
did  not  set  on  foot  any  particular  perse- 
cution against  them.  All  depended  on 
the  individual  characters  of  the  governors; 
many  sought  expedients  to  save  the  lives 
of  the  Christians  brought   before   them 


•  Euseb.  ii.  7. 

■j-  Tertullian,  de  Fuga  in  Pereecut. 


without  a  violation  of  the  laws ;  others 
treated  them  with  violence,  either  from 
personal  enmity,  or  to  gratify  the  popular 
voice ;  and  others  iigain  contented  them- 
selves with  keeping  to  the  very  letter  of 
Trajan's  law.  Tertullian  in  his  letter  to 
a  persecutor  of  Christianity,  the  proconsul 
Scapula,  tells  him  that  he  might  fulfil  all 
that  the  law  required  from  his  office, 
without  indulging  in  cruelty,  if  he  would 
only  use  the  sicord  against  the  Christians 
according  to  the  provisions  of  the  original 
laWy  as  the  Praeses  of  Mauritania,  and  that 
of  Leon,  in  Spain,  were  still  in  the  habit 
of  doing. 

We  shall  now  relate  a  few  character- 
istic anecdotes  connected  with  the  history 
of  the  persecutions  of  these  times.  Some 
Christians  from  the  town  of  Scillita,  in 
Numidia,  were  brought  before  the  tribu- 
nal of  the  proconsul  Saturninus,  A.  D. 
200.  He  said  to  them,  "You  may  receive 
pardon  from  our  emperors  (Severus  and 
Caracalla,)  if  you  will  only  return  in  good 
earnest  to  our  gods."  One  of  them,  by 
name  Speratus,  answered,  "  We  have  done 
no  evil  to  any  man,  we  have  spoken  no 
evil  against  any  man  ;  nay,  for  all  the 
wrongs  which  you  have  inflicted  on  us, 
we  have  only  thanked  you.  We  praise 
for  all  his  dispensations  the  true  Lord  and 
King."  The  proconsul  replied,  "  We 
too  are  pious,  and  we  swear  by  the  genius 
of  the  emperor,  our  lord,  and  we  pray  for 
his  welfare,  which  you  must  also  do." 
On  this,  Speratus  said,  "  I  know  of  no 
genius  of  the  ruler  of  this  earth,  but  I 
serve  my  God  in  heaven,  whom  no  man 
hath  ever  seen,  nor  can  see.  I  have  never 
stolen  any  thing  from  any  man  ;  I  pay 
scrupulously  all  the  taxes  and  tributes 
which  are  due  from  me,  for  I  acknow- 
ledge the  emperor  as  my  ruler,  but  1  can 
worship  only  my  Lord,  the  King  of  kings, 
the  Lord  of  all  nations."  The  proconsul 
upon  this  ordered  the  Christians  to  be 
reconducted  to  prison  till  the  next  day. 
On  the  next  day,  when  they  appeared 
again,  and  he  was  unable  to  persuade 
them,  he  granted  them  three  days  more 
for  deliberation.  Speratus,  however,  an- 
swered in  the  name  of  tlie  rest,  "I  am  a 
Christian,  we  are  all  Christians,  and  we 
will  not  depart  from  tlie  faith  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  Dispose  of  us  as  you  will." 
They  were  now,  as  they  had  avowed 
themselves  to  be  Christians,  and  refused 
to  show  the  emperor  the  honour  which 
was  required  from  them,  condemned  to  be 
beheaded.  On  receiving  their  sentence 
they  thanked  God,  and  on  arriving  at  the 


72 


place  of  execution  they  fell  on  their  knees, 
and  again  thanked  God. 

A  few  years  afterwards  three  young 
men,  named  Stevocatiis,  Saturninus,  and 
Secundulus,  and  two  young  women, 
named  Perpetua  and  Felicitas,  were  seized 
in  Carthage,  while  they  were  all  catechu- 
mens. Their  confinement  and  their  suf- 
ferings present  many  lovely  traits  of  the 
power  of  Christian  faith,  united  with 
Christian  tenderness  of  disposition.  Per- 
petua was  a  woman  of  two-and-twenty 
years  of  age,  and  the  mother  of  a  child, 
which  was  still  hanging  on  her  breast. 
]^)eside  the  common  struggles  of  flesh  and 
blood  against  the  hand  of  death,  she  had 
other  and  tenderer  feelings  to  contend 
with,  those  pure  feelings  of  human  nature 
which  Christianity  recognises  in  all  their 
strength,  and  which  genuine  Christianity 
even  heightens,  while  at  the  same  time  it 
requires  the  sacrifice  of  tliem  to  the  One 
to  whom  all  must  yield.  The  mother  of 
Perpetua  was  a  Christian,  but  her  aged 
father  was  a  heathen.  Besides  the  bitter- 
ness of  losing  a  beloved  daughter,  he 
feared  the  ignominy  which  her  execution 
as  a  Christian  would  bring  upon  him. 
As  soon  as  she  was  taken  into  custody, 
her  aged  father  came  to  her  to  say,  that 
she  might  recant.  She  pointed  to  a  vessel 
which  lay  upon  the  ground — "Can  I," 
said  she^  "  call  this  vessel  any  thing  else 
than  what  it  really  is  .?"  "  No."  "  Well, 
then,"  she  added,  "  as  little  can  I  aver  that 
I  am  not  a  Christian."  In  the  meantime 
she  was  baptized,  as  it  appears  that  spi- 
ritual persons  in  the  execution  of  their 
ofiicial  duty  were  able  to  buy  free  access 
to  the  prisoners  from  the  keepers  of  the 
prisons  at  a  very  cheap  rate ;  but  in  this 
case  the  purchase  of  such  a  permission 
may  not  have  been  necessary,  as  they 
were  not  then  under  such  rigorous  cus- 
tody. Perpetua  said,  "•  The  Spirit  prompted 
me  to  ask  at  my  baptis?n  nothing  else 
than  patience."  A  few  days  after  they 
were  all  thrown  into  the  dungeon.  "  I 
was  terrified,"  she  said,  "because  I  had 
never  before  been  in  such  darkness.  O 
what  a  wretched  day !  The  stifling  heat 
from  tlie  number  of  the  prisoners,  the  rude 
treatment  we  suflered  from  the  soldiers, 
and  to  add  to  all  this,  my  anxiety  for  my 
child!"     The    deacons*    who   gave    the 


PERPETUA  S    FIRMNESS. 


*  ["  Diaconca  qui  nobis  ministrabant."  Acta 
Martyr,  ap.  Ruinart.  p.  94.  I  suppose  Dr.  Ncan- 
der  to  mean  that  they  brought  the  consecrated  ele- 
ments to  the  Christians,  a  piactice  well  known 
net  to  be  unfrequent.  See  Mosheim,  Hist.  Eccles. 


communion  to  them  in  the  dungeon,  pur- 
chased for  the  Christian  prisoners  a  better 
residence  in  the  prison,  where  they  were 
separated  from  other  criminals.  Perpetua 
now  took  her  child  to  her  breast  in  prison, 
and  commended  it  to  her  mother;  she 
comforted  the  rest,  and  felt  herself  revived 
by  having  her  child  near  her.  "  Tlie  pri- 
son," said  she,  "  now  became  a  palace 
to  me." 

The  report  that  they  were  about  to  be 
tried  having  reached  her  aged  father,  he 
hastened  to  her  and  said,  "  My  daughter, 
pity  my  grey  hairs,  pity  thy  father,  if  I  am 
worthy  to  be  called  thy  father !  I  have 
brought  thee  up  to  the  bloom  of  thy  age; 
I  have  preferred  thee  to  all  thy  brothers  ; 
give  me  not  up  then  to  such  shame  among 
men !  Look  upon  thy  mother  and  thy 
aunt!  look  upon  thy  infant  son,  whose 
death  must  shortly  follow  thine !  Lay 
aside  thy  haughty  spirit,  lest  thou  exter- 
minate .our  race  !  not  one  of  us  can  again 
speak  with  the  freedom  of  a  man,  if  thou 
come  to  such  an  end."  As  he  spoke,  he 
kissed  his  daughter's  hand,  and  throwing 
himself  at  her  feet,  called  her  not  his 
daughter,  but  his  mistress.  "  The  grey 
hairs  of  my  father,"  says  Perpetua,  "gave 
me  pain.  I  lamented  that  he  alone,  of  all 
my  family,  would  not  rejoice  in  my  suf- 
ferings." She  said  to  him,  "  When  I  stand 
before  the  tribunal,  God's  will  must  come 
to  pass !  for  remember,  we  stand  not  in 
our  own  power,  but  in  that  of  God." 
When  this  decisive  moment  came,  her 
father  also  approached,  to  try  his  last 
efforts  with  his  daughter.  The  governor 
said  to  Perpetua,  "  Take  pity  on  thy 
father's  grey  hairs,  take  pity  on  thy  tender 
child.  Offer  sacrifices  for  the  prosperity 
of  the  emperor."  Perpetua :  "  That  I 
cannot  do."  Gov. :  "  Art  thou  a  Chris- 
tian ?"  Perpetua  :  "  I  am  a  Ciiristian." 
Her  fate  was  now  decided.  "  His  unhappy 
age  pained  my  nearl,"  says  Perpetua,  "  as 
deeply  as  if  I  myself  were  in  his  case." 
Tliey  were  all  condemned  on  the  ensuing 
festival  of  Geta's  accession*  to  be  thrown 
to  wild  beasts,  and  thus  afford  a  cruel 
sport  to  the  soldiery  and  people.  They 
returned  to  their  prison  rejoicing;  the  ten- 
derness of  a  mother's  feelings  did  not 
overwhelm  Perpetua,  she  sent  to  her 
fatlier  for  her  child  that  she  might  give  it 
suck,  but  the  father  would  not  part  with 


Sec.  ii.  Part  ii.  cap.  iv.  §  12.  et  alib.     See  also 
Justin   Martyr,   Apolog.    I.  §   85.     (Ed.   Grabe. 
Oxon.  1700,  p.   128.)  and  Hieronyini  Epist.  4, 
near  the  end. — H.  J.  R.] 
*  IMatales  (Jssaris. 


HELIOGABALUS ALEXANDER    SEVERUS. 


73 


it.  Violent  suffering*  having  come  on 
Felicitas  at  her  return  to  prison,  the  jailor 
said  to  her, — "  If  thou  canst  scarcely  bear 
these  sufferings,  what  wilt  thou  do  when 
thou  art  cast  before  wild  beasts  ?  and  yet 
thou  despisest  them  by  thy  refusing  to 
sacrifice  !"  She  answered,  "  What  I  now 
suffer,  I  suffer  myself,  but  then  it  will  be 
another  who  will  suffer  for  me,  because  I 
shall  suffer  for  Him."  As  it  was  usual  in 
those  days,  in  compliance  with  some  of 
the  customs  which  had  been  retained  from 
the  times  in  which  human  sacrifices  were 
offered  to  Baal,  to  clothe  those  condemned 
to  die  by  wild  beasts  in  priestly  garments, 
they  wished  to  dress  the  Christian  men  as 
priests  of  Saturn,  and  the  women  as  j 
priestesses  of  Ceres.  Their  free  and 
Christian  spirits,  however,  revolted  against 
this.  "  We  have  come  here  voluntarily," 
said  they,  "  that  our  freedom  might  not 
be  taken  away  from  us.  We  have  given 
up  our  lives,  that  we  might  not  be  com- 
pelled to  these  practices."  The  heatliens 
themselves  recognised  the  justice  of  their 
demand,  and  gave  up  the  point. 

Before  these  martyrs  received  their 
death-blow,  after  being  torn  by  the  beasts, 
they  mutually  took  leave  of  each  other 
for  the  last  time,  with  the  brotherly  kiss 
of  Christian  affection. 

With  the  reign  of  Ileliogabalus,  A.  D. 
219,  a  more  tranquil  season  for  the  Chris- 
tian Church  began,  although  the  indul- 
gence of  this  emperor  towards  the  Chris- 
tians proceeded  from  no  virtuous  motives. 
He  was  no  follower  of  the  old  Boman  re- 
ligion, but  was  himself  devoted  to  certain 
foreign  rites,  that  is,  to  the  Syrian  wor- 
ship of  the  sun,  a  service  consisting  of 
the  most  abominable  impurities.  He 
wished  to  establish  this  as  the  prevaiUng 
form  of  religion  in  the  Roman  empire, 
and  to  blend  all  others  into  it,  and  with 
this  view  he  tolerated  Christianity  as  well 
as  other  foreign  religions.  Had  he  been 
able  to  carry  his  intentions  into  execu- 
tion, the  Christians  would  certainly  have 
been  his  most  zealous  opponents.^ 

His  successor,  the  noble  and  pious  Alex- 
ander Severus,  (from  A.  D.  212 — 235,) 
was  a  man  of  wholly  different  character 
from  his  vicious  predecessor ;  and  his  fa- 
vourable disposition  towards  Christianity 
and  Christians,  proceeded  from  entirely 
difierent   grounds.     The   sensibilities  of 


*  ["The  pains  of  labour,"  according  to  the 
original  Latin. — H.  J.  K.] 

t  JEl  Lamprid.  Vit.  c.  3.  6,  7.  [See  Gibbon, 
vol.  i.  ch.  vi.— H.  J.  R.] 

10 


this  excellent  prince  were  alive  to  all  that 
is  good,  and  he  felt  a  reverence  for  every 
thing  connected  with  religion.  In  his  re- 
ligion he  was  adtlicted  to  the  then  pre- 
vailing fashion  of  electicism,  and  he  in- 
cluded Christianity  among  those  religions 
from  which  he  drew  his  stores.  He  re- 
cognised Christ  as  a  Divine  Being,  to- 
gether with  other  gods ;  and  in  his  lara- 
riiim,  or  domestic  chapel,  where  he  odered 
his  morning  devotions,  among  the  busts 
of  those  men  whom  he  regarded  as  beings 
of  a  higher  order,  such  as  Apollonius  of 
Tyana,  and  Orpheus,  there  was  placed 
also  a  bust  of  Christ!  Now  this  must 
have  been  with  the  intention  of  receiving 
Christ  among  the  Roman  gods.  He  was 
constantly  in  the  habit  of  using  our  Sa- 
viour's saying,  in  Luke  vi.  31:  "What 
ye  will  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  do 
ye  likewise  unto  them ;"  and  he  caused 
it  to  be  engraved  on  the  walls  of  his  pa- 
lace, and  on  public  monuments.  While 
Julia  IMammsea,  the  mother  of  this  em- 
peror, who  had  great  influence  over  him, 
was  resident  at  Antioch,  she  sent  for  Ori- 
gen,  the  great  pastor  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church,  and  Origen,  who  was  of  all  men 
the  most  capable  of  recommending  Chris- 
tianity to  habits  of  mind  quite  foreign  to 
it,  no' doubt  made  use  of  this  opportunity 
to  do  so  with  her,  and  Julia  Mammaea 
may,  in  return,  have  worked  upon  tlie 
disposition  of  her  son.  Since  this  em- 
peror was,  therefore,  so  favourably  in- 
clined to  Christianity ;  since  he  gave  the 
world  to  understand  that  he  recognised 
the  existence  of  a  lawful  association  in 
the  Christian  community,  by  new-model- 
ling the  appointments  to  state  oflices, 
after  the  regulations  in  use  among  Chris- 
tian Churches,  and  by  assigning  to  the 
Christian  Church  in  Rome  a  piece  of 
ground,  which  they  disputed  with  the 
corporation  of  cooks  [or  rather,  perhaps, 
restaurateurs ;]  all  this  tends  to  show  the 
more  strongly  with  how  great  reluctance 
the  Roman  emperors  published  any  new 
edicts  in  matters  concerning  religion  ;  for, 
as  far  as  we  know,  he  enacted  no  law  by 
Avhich  Christianity  was  received  among 
the  "  religiones  licitai."  Indeed,  Domi- 
tius  Ulpianus,  the  celebrated  civilian  in 
the  reign  of  Alexander  Severus,  (for  it 
was  probably  this  same  Domitius,)  col- 
lected the  rescripts  of  former  emperors 
against  the  Christians*  in  his  work  "  De 
Officio  Proconsulis." 

The  rude  Thracian,  Maximinus,  who, 


*  Lactant.  Institut  Lib.  v.  c  xi. 
G 


T4 


PHILIP   THE    ARABIAN,  FROM   A.  D.  244. 


after  the  murder  of  the  excellent  Alexan- 
der Severus,  A.  D.  235,  raised  himself  to 
the  imperial  throne,  hated  the  Christians 
because  iiis  predecessor  had  been  on 
friendly  terras  with  them,  and  especially 
persecuted  those  bishops  who  had  been 
the  most  connected  with  Severus.  (Eu- 
sebius  vi  28.)  In  many  districts,  as  in 
Cappadocia  and  Ponlus,  desolating  earth- 
quakes assisted  in  waking  again  the  fury 
of  the  populace  against  the  Christians. 
Under  such  an  emperor,  this  fury  would 
have  full  play,  and  in  many  cases  it  was 
also  backed  by  the  governors  of  the  pro- 
vinces. But  it  was  only  in  particular  dis- 
tricts that  the  Christians  were  persecuted, 
and  they  were  able  to  escape  by  flight 
into    others ;    and    yet   this  persecution, 


tion;  but  we  do  not  find  a  single  thing  in 
him  to  induce  us  to  believe  that  the  ruler 
of  the  Roman  empire  was  a  Christian, 
although  he  had  certainly  some  occasion 
to  mention  such  a  circumstance.  It  will, 
perhaps,  be  said,  that  the  emperor  kept 
concealed  his  conversion  to  Christianity 
from  political  grounds ;  but,  then,  it  does 
not  suit  with  this  view,  to  suppose  that 
he  visited  a  Christian  church,  especially 
at  such  a  time,  and  still  less,  that  he 
submitted  to  the  penance  of  the  Church. 
We  find,  indeed,  the  first  trace  of  the  story 
of  his  conversion  to  Christianity  in  an 
author  of  reputation,  who  wrote  in  the 
time  of  Valerian,  who  reigned  very  shortly 
after  Philip.  Dyonysius  of  Alexandria* 
says  of  Valerian,  "  He  showed  himself 


though  less  severe  than  those  of  former  |  even  better  inclined  towards  the  Chris- 
times,  made  a  greater  impression,  because  j  lians   than   those  who   were  themselves 


the  long  interval  of  repose  had  left  men 
unprepared  to  expect  hostile  measures.* 

A  more  favourable  season  for  Chris- 
tians again  appeared  on  the  accession  of 
Philip  the  Arabian,  A.  D.  244.  This  em- 
peror, it  is  said,  was  a  Christian  himself.t 
It  is  expressly  related,  that  when  he  wished 
to  join  a  Christian  congregation  on  Eas- 
ter-eve, the  bishopj  of  the  Church  met 
him  at  the  entrance,  and  declared  to  him, 
that  in  consequence  of  the  crimes  which 
he  had  committed,§  he  could  not  be  al- 
lowed to  approach  till  he  had  submitted 
to  the  penance  of  the  Church,  and  that 
the  emperor  really  pledged  himself  to  the 
observance  of  it.  This  narration,  how- 
ever, does  not  harmonize  well  with  what 
we  learn  of  this  emperor  from  other 
sources.  In  all  his  public  life,  for  in- 
stance, in  the  money  which  he  coined, 
there  is  not  a  single  trace  of  Christianity ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  he  always  appears 
as  a  follower  of  the  heathen  state  religion. 
Origen,  who  was  in  communication  with 
the  royal  family,||  and  wrote  his  work 
against  Celsus  in  this  reign,  gives  us  to 
understand,  indeed,  that  the  Christians 
were  then  in  a  very  comfortable  condi- 


*  See  the  Epistle  of  Firmilianus  Cffisariensis 
in  Cyprian,  No.  75,  and  Origen,  Comment,  in 
Matth.  vol.  iii.  857,  ed.  de  la  Rue. 

I  Euscbius  uses  the  expression,  n-^Ti^u  wjcc, 
in  his  Church  History;  but  in  his  Chronicle  he 
expressly  names  him  as  the  first  Christian  em- 
peror. 

:t:  By  a  later  tradition  it  would  appear  that  it 
was  Babylos,  bishop  of  Antioch. 

§  This  must  have  been  an  allusion  to  the  mur- 
der of  his  predecessor,  Uordianus. 

II  He  wrote  letters  to  the  emperor  and  his  wife 
Severa,  which  are  now  lost. 


Christians."  We  cannot  understand,  by 
these  words,  any  other  emperors  than  Alex- 
ander Severus  and  this  Philip ;  and  the 
well-informed  Dionysius  apparently  clas- 
ses them  together.  Philip  may,  probably, 
have  included  Christianity  in  his  religious 
electicism,  and  then  an  exaggerated  report 
made  him  out  a  Christian.  The  murder 
of  his  predecessor,  however,  and  much 
besides  about  him,  corresponded  very  ill 
with  the  supposition  of  his  Christianity; 
and  in  order  to  reconcile  these  conflict- 
ing accounts,  the  report  added  the  fiction 
about  Easter-eve. 

Instead  of  dwelling  longer  on  this  ex- 
aggerated story,  before  we  pass  over  to 
the  next  struggle  of  the  Christian  Church, 
we  shall  consider  the  remarkable  works 
of  the  great  Christian  pastor,  Origen,  who 
wrote  in  these  days,  concerning  the  per- 
secution which  the  Church  had  hitherto 
endured,  its  then  external  condition,  and 
its  future  prospects.  lie  says,  in  regard 
to  the  earlier  persecutions,!  "  Although 
the  Christians,  who  were  commanded  not 
to  defend  themselves  by  violence  against 
their  enemies,  complied  with  this  tender 
and  humane  precept;  yet  that  which 
they  never  could  have  obtained,  however 
powerful  they  might  have  been,  had  they 
been  permitted  to  go  to  war,  that  they 
have  received  from  Gor/,  who  has  always 
fought  for  them,  and  who  has  at  times 
imposed  tranquillity  on  those  who  opposed 
them,  and  would  extirpate  their  religion  : 
for,  as  a  kind  of  warning  and  memorial  to 
them,  that  when  they  saw  some  few  con- 
tend for  their  religion,  they  might  become 

'   Euseb.  vii.  10. 

t  Lib.  iii.  p.  119.  [p.  116.  Ed.  Spencer.] 


ORIGEN    PREDICTS    PERSECUTIONS. 


75 


stronger,  and  despise  death,  a/cjc  (so  few 
that  t/iey  may  easily  be  numbered)  have  at 
times  suffered  death  for  the  Christian  reli- 
gion ;*  and  thus  God  has  prevented  a  war 
of  extermination  against  the  whole  body 
of  Christians ;  for  he  wished  their  con- 
tinuance, he  wished  that  tlie  whole  earth 
should  be  filled  with  their  salutary  and 
most  holy  doctrine.  And,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  the  weaker  brethren  might  take 
breath,  and  be  relieved  from  the  fear  of 
death,  God  cared  for  the  believers,  by  so 
scattering,  through  his  own  mere  w  ill,  all 
assaults  upon  them,  that  neither  emperor 
nor  governor,  nor  the  multitude,  should 
prevail  against  them  further."  lie  says, 
in  reference  to  his  own  times,  "■  God  hath 
constantly  caused  the  number  of  Chris- 
tians to  increase,  their  number  is  still 
daily  on  the  increase,  and  he  hath  already 
given  to  them  the  free  exercise  of  their 
reUgion^\  although  a  thousand  obstacles 
opposed  the  propagation  of  the  doctrine 
of  Jesus  in  the  world.  But  since  it  was 
God  who  willed  that  the  doctrine  of  Jesus 
should  become  a  blessing  to  the  heathen, 
all  the  assaults  of  men  against  other 
Christians  have  been  brought  to  shame. 
And  the  more  the  emperors,  the  governors, 
and  the  multitude,  have  sought  to  oppress 
the  Christians,  the  more  powerful  have 
these  latter  become.''''X  He  says,  that 
among  the  multitude  of  those  who  em- 
braced Christianity,  were  also  many  rich 
people,  many  in  high  offices,  and  rich 
and  well-born  women  ;§  that  now  a  Chris- 
tian pastor  might  obtain  honour  and  re- 
spect, but,  nevertheless,  that  the  contempt 
with  which  others  treated  him  was  greater 
than  the  reverence  with  which  he  was 
regarded  by  believers. ||  He  remarks,  that 
notwithstanding  all  this,  even  yet  the  hor- 
rible accusations  against  the  Christians 
obtained  belief  with  many,  who  abom- 
inated holding  the  slightest  intercourse 
with  Christians,  even  speaking  to  them.lT 
He  writes,  that  through  God's  will  the 
persecutions  against  the  Christians  had 
now  long  since  ceased ;  but  casting  a 
glance  into  futurity,  he  adds,  that  this 
tranquillity  Avould  readily  cease'  in  its 
turn,  whenever  the  calumniators  of  Chris- 
tianity should  again  have  spread  abroad 
the  opinion,  that  the  cause  of  the  numer- 


*   'Oyjyot  aura.  KUt^'.vt  k-u  a-(pcJ^it  (ua^S/^moi  (/T«g 

j"  'Hjx  Si  KM  T-X^^nyiiV  iTTiJlJatKi. 

i  Lib.  vii.  p.  yo9. 

§  rni;  tcdy  tv  K.^imfJiu<n,  kou  yutau*  ret  a^^u.  km 

11  Lib.  iii.  p.  120.        ^  Lib.  vi.  p.  302. 


ous  seditions  (during  the  later  years  of 
this  emperor,)  was  the  great  number  of 
the  Christians,  wiio  had  increased  so  much 
from  not  being  persecuted.*  He  foresaw 
also,  that  the  persecutions  had  not  yet 
reached  their  limit,  and  that  the  opinion, 
"  that  the  downfall  of  the  state-religion, 
and  that  the  irresistible  propagation  of 
Christianity,  were  bringing  disaster  on  the 
Roman  empire,  would,  sooner  or  later, 
again  revive  the  flames  of  persecution ;" 

i  but  he  adds,  "  when  God  wills,  we  enjoy 
in  a  wonderful  manner  peace  in  a  world 
which  hates  us,  and  we  confide  in  Him 
who  says, '  Be  of  good  cheer,  1  have  over- 
come the  world.'  He  has,  indeed,  over- 
come the  world  !  Inasmuch,  then,  as  He 
who  hath  overcome  the  world  wills  that 
we  should  overcome  the  world,  since  He 
hath  received  power  from  the  Father  to 
overcome  the  world,  we  confide  in  his 
victory.  But  if  he  wills  that  we  should 
again  contend  and  battle  for  the  faith,  let 
the  adversaries  come,  and  we  will  say  to 
them  : — '  We  are  able  to  do  all  things 
through  Him  that  makes  us  strong — Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord!'"  He  was  persuaded 
that  hereafter  all  other  religions  would 
fall  to  the  ground,  and  Christianity  alone 
would  prevail,  as  even  then  it  was  con- 
stantly gaining  more  souls.| 

What  the  sharp  sighted  Origen  predict- 
ed, soon  happened ;  nay,  while  he  was 
writing  this  in  Caesarea  of  Palestine,  it  had 
already  taken  place  in  another  district.  In 
Alexandria,  an  enthusiast  or  an  impostor, 
who  appealed  to  special  revelations,  which 
he  had  individually  received  from  the 
gods,  excited  the  rage  of  the  people  against 
the  Christians.^  As  it  had  often  happened 
before,  that  a  persecuting  government  had 
followed  a  favourable  one,  as  Marcus  Au- 
relius  had  followed  Antoninus  Pius,  and 
Maximin  the  Thracian,  Alexander  Severus, 
so  it  happened  now  also,  when  Decius 
Trajanus,  after  conquering  Philip  the  Ara- 
bian, A.  D.  249,  had  ascended  the  impe- 
rial throne.  It  is  exceedingly  natural  that 
when  an  emperor  zealously  devoted  to 
Paganism,  followed  one  favourable  to  the 

j  Christians,  he  should  feel  himself  bound, 
on  that  very  account,  to  renew  with  re- 
doubled strictness  and  severity,  and  to 
execute  most  thorouglily,  the  older  laws, 
which  had  fallen  into  disuse,  against  the 
Christians,  who,  during  his  predecessor's 
reign,  had  increased  so  widely.  And  we 
can  here  also  with  Origen  recognise  an 


Lib.  iii.  p.  123.         t  Tom.  viii.  436-7. 
t  Euaeb.  vi.  41. 


76 


DECIUS   TRAJANUS,  A.  D.  250 — HIS    EDICT. 


especial  precaution  of  God's  providence; 
since  in  the  long  interval  of  repose  many 
Christians,  unmindful  of  their  call  to 
combat  for  the  faith,  had  suffered  them- 
selves to  grow  slothful,  since  so  many, 
who  were  destitute  of  vital  Christianity, 
had  crept  into  the  Christian  Church,  or 
remained  in  it  because  they  were  descend- 
ed from  Christian  parents,  it  would  seem 
that  the  power  and  truth  of  faith  must  be 
awakened  and  proved  by  some  new  terri- 
ble struggle,  the  Church  at  the  same  time 
purified,  and  the  real  and  genuine  mem- 
bers of  it  separated  from  the  pretended. 
In  many  provinces  the  Christians  had  en- 
joyed an  undisturbed  repose  of  thirty 
years,  in  others  even  a  longer  time.  Cy- 
prian, the  bishop  of  Carthage,  on  this  ac- 
count, (in  his  Sermo  de  Lapsis,)  complains 
that  this  peace  had  had  a  soporific  influ- 
ence on  a  part  of  the  Christians,  and  that 
much  worldly  mmdedness  had  taken  root 
in  consequence  among  both  laity  and  clergy. 
The  Church,  therefore,  needed  again  to 
go  through  the  purifying  influence  of  the 
fire.  So  Cyprian,  after  the  first  storm 
of  persecution  had  subsided,  taught  his 
Church  to  view  the  matter.  "  When  the 
cause  of  the  sickness,"  says  he  to  his 
flock,  "  is  once  known,  then  the  remedy 
for  the  wound  may  be  found.  The  Lord 
wished  to  prove  his  people,  because  the 
course  of  life  which  God  commands  had 
been  destroyed  in  the  long  time  of  our 
tranquillity.  A  divine  chastisement  hath, 
therefore,  roused  the  Church,  fast  sinking 
as  it  then  was,  into  sleep  and  carelessness. 
Although  by  our  sins  we  deserve  more, 
yet  the  merciful  God  has  so  managed  that 
all  whicjr  befel  us  appeared  to  be  rather 
a  trial  than  a  persecution.  While  men 
forgot  what  the  believers  did  in  the  time 
of  the  aposdes,  and  what  they  ought 
always  to  do,  they  gave  their  minds,  with 
insatiable  desire,  to  the  increase  of  their 
temporal  possessions.  Many  of  the 
bishops,  who  ought  by  example  and  ex- 
hortation to  lead  the  rest,  neglected  their 
divine  calling,  and  busied  themselves  with 
the  administration  of  worldly  afi'airs." 
Since  such,  therefore,  was  the  state  of 
many  Churches,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  a 
persecution,  which  in  its  first  course 
seemed  likely  to  be  very  severe,  must 
have  made  a  great  impression  on  persons 
unaccustomed  to  persecution. 

It  was  certainly  the  intention  of  the 
emperor  entirely  to  crush  Christianity. 
He  ordered*  (A.  D.250)  strict  inquiry  to 

*  [V.  Eusel).  Hist.  Eccles.  vi.  39.  Pearson, 
Annal,  Cyprian,  ad  ann.  249,  No.  12.  H.  J.  R.] 


be  made  about  all  persons  suspected  of 
non-observance  of  the  state  religions — 
and  Christians  were  to  be  required  to  com- 
ply with  the  ceremonies  of  the  Roman 
state-religion.  ]f  they  refused,  threats, 
and  afterwards  tortures,  were  to  be  made 
use  of,  to  induce  them  to  give  in.  ]f  they 
stood  steadfast  in  the  faith,  then,  especially 
against  the  bishops,  whom  the  emperor 
hated  the  most,  sentence  of  death  was  pro- 
nounced :  but  the  intention  was  at  first  to 
try  how  far  they  could  succeed  with  the 
Christians  by  commands,  by  threats,  by 
persuasion,  and  light  punishments  ;  they 
proceeded  gradually  to  more  severe  mea- 
sures, and  the  persecution  gradually  ex- 
tended itself  into  the  provinces  from  the 
metropolis,  where  the  presence  of  the 
emperor,  a  declared  enemy  of  the  Chris- 
tians, made  the  persecution  at  first  the  most 
severe.  Wherever  the  edict  of  the  em- 
peror was  carried  into  execution,  the  first 
step  was  publicly  to  appoint  a  day,  before 
which,  all  the  Christians  of  any  place 
were  to  appear  before  the  magistrate, 
abjure  their  religion,  and  offer  sacrifice. 
Those  who  fled  their  country  before  this 
day,  escaped  with  the  confiscation  of  their 
property,  and  a  prohibition  of  their  return, 
under  the  penalty  of  death.  But  with 
those  who  were  unwdling  to  sacrifice  at 
once  their  earthly  possessions  to  a  crown 
of  glory  in  heaven,  and  waited  for  some- 
thing that  might  open  a  middle  path  for 
them,  when  they  did  not  appear  of  their 
own  accord  on  the  appointed  day,  the 
court  of  inquiry,*  composed  of  the  magis- 
trate and  five  of  the  principal  citizens, 
began  its  operation.  After  repeated  tor- 
tures, those  who  remained  steadfast  were 
thrown  into  prison,  where  hunger  and 
thirst  were  employed  to  weaken  their  re- 
solution. It  does  not  appear  that  the 
punishment  of  death  was  very  commonly 
resorted  to.  Many  magistrates,  who  were 
more  interested  in  extorting  money  than 
in  executing  the  laws,  or  wiio  wished  to 
spare  the  Cliristians,  agreed  with  them,' 
that  although  they  really  (Hd  not  ofler 
sacrifice,  yet  they  would  suffer  a  certifi- 
cate (libellum)  to  be  set  forth,  declaring 
that  they  had  complied  with  the  regula- 
tion of  the  edict.]'"  Others,  while  they 
were  anxious  to  escape  the  putting  forth 


*  Cyprian,  Ep.  xl.  (Ep.  xliii.  ea.  Ox.)  "  Quinque 
primores  illi,  qui  edicto  nuper  magistratibus  fuerant 
copulati,  ut  fidem  nostram  subrucrent."  The  ex- 
pression ."edicto"  renders  it  liardiy  prof>abIc  that 
this  regulation  was  confined  to  Carthage. 

f  Tliose  who  received  such  certificates  were 
cailcd  "  Libellatici." 


FAITH    OP  THE    CHRISTIANS    AT   CARTHAGE.  77 

such  a  certificate,  yet,  without  ever  even  '  tion — some  fled,  and  others  were  arrested, 
appearing  before  tlie  magistrates,  obtained  Among  these  latter,  some  went  as  far  as 
the  entry  of  their  names  in  the  magisterial  to  endure  the  fixing  of  the  chains  and  the 
protocol,  or  register,  among  those  who  arrest;  others  bore  the  confinement  for  a 
had  been  obedient  to  the  edict.  (*Acta  few  days,  and  then  abjured,  even  before 
facientes.)  Many  erred  ignorantly,  think-  they  had  been  sent  for  to  jiidgnieiit : 
ing  that  they  remained  true  to  their  faith  [  others,  after  enduring  the  tortures  up  to  a 
when  they  did  nothing  which  was  con-   certain  degree,  gave  in;  but  the  blessed 


trary  to  their  religion,  (neither  offered 
sacrifice  nor  burnt  incense,  &.c.)  but  only 
allowed  others  to  say  that  they  had  done 
so.  The  Church,  however,  always  con- 
demned this  as  a  tacit  abjuration  of  their 
faith. 

Let  us  now  take  a  picture  of  the  effects 
of  this  bloody  persecution  among  the 
Cliristians  in  the  large  cities,  such  as 
Alexandria  and  Carthage,  from  the  hands 
of  Dionysius,t  the  bishop  of  Alexandria, 
whose  very  words  we  are  now  about  to 
quote.  "  All  were  thrown  into  consterna- 
tion by  this  terrible  edict,  and  many  of 
the  higher  classes  of  citizens];  presented 
themselves  from  fear  immediately,  partly 
of  their  own  accord,  partly  brought  by 
the  public§  necessity,  which  was  imposed 
upon  them,  and  partly  as  they  were 
brought  by  their  relations  and  friends. 
And,  as  each  was  called  upon  by  name, 
they  approached  the  unholy  sacrifices, 
some  of  them  pale  and  trembling,  not  as 
if  they  were  to  perform  a  sacrifice^  but  as 
if  they  were  to  be  themselves  victims 
slaughtered  to  the  idols;  so  that  the  mul- 
titude around  treated  them  with  bitter 
scorn  and  ridicule,  and  it  was  clear  to  all 
that  they  were  alike  afraid,  either  to  die 
or  to  sacrifice.  Others,  however,  volun- 
tarily ran  up  to  the  altars,  boldly  averring, 
that  they  never  had  been  Christians — in 
whom  the  saying  of  our  Lord  was  verified, 
that  '  the  rich  can  hardly  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.'  The  rest  of  the 
Christians  partly  followed  the  example 
of  these  two  classes  of  persons  of  condi- 


*  Cyp.  Ep.  xxxi.  "Qui  acta  fecissent,  licet 
prssentes  cum  fierent  non  adfuissent — ut  sic 
scriberentur  mandando." 

-j-  Euseb.  vi.  41. 

t  Oi  5r£g;^av63-T»«,  the  "  personffi  insignes,"  to 
whom  the  attention  of  the  heathen  was  first 
turned,  and  who  were  in  greater  danger  than  all 
others. 

§  0(  Si  Sn fji'.iTimvnK  uTm  tim  Tr^a^fuv  iyitrc.  I 
think  these  words  are  a  translation  of  the  Latin 
law  phrase,  "  .\clis  publicis  convenlri."  The 
translation  of  Rufinus  also  favours  this  supposi- 
tion, as  well  as  the  antithesis  of  the  passage. 

[The  note  of  Valesius  on  this  passage  rather 
supports  this  interpretation,  and  is  worth  consult- 
ing. He  makes  it  mean,  that  "some  being  in 
public  offices,  were  obliged  to  appear  at  the  read- 
ing of  the  edict.— H.  J.  K.] 


and  steadfast  pillars  of  the  Lord,  who 
were  strengthened  by  Him,  and  received 
might  and  steadfastness  from  Him,  as  they 
were  worthy  of  their  firm  faith,  and  acted 
up  to  it,  became  wonderful  witnesses  of 
his  kingdom."  Among  these,  Dionysius 
mentions  Dioscoros,a  boy  of  fifteen  years 
of  age,  who,  by  his  excellent  answers  and 
his  firmness  under  torture,  extorted  such 
admiration  from  the  governor,  that  he  let 
him  go  free,  declaring  to  him  that  he  gave 
his  tender  years  time  to  repent. 

There  appeared  in  most  districts  glori- 
ous traits  of  Christian  faithfulness  and 
devotion  to  the  cause.  At  Carthage,  we 
read  of  a  certain  Numidicus,  whom  Cy- 
prian, the  bishop,  took  into  the  presby- 
tery, because  he  had  so  highly  dis- 
tinguished himself  during  the  persecution. 
After  encouraging  many  others  to  a  mar- 
tyr's death,  after  seeing  his  own  wife 
expire  on  the  funeral  pile,  he  was  himself, 
half-burnt  and  almost  crushed  with  stones, 
left  for  dead.  His  daughter  sought  the 
corpse  of  her  father  under  the  heap  of 
stones,  in  order  to  bury  him.  How  rap- 
tured must  she  have  been  to  find  some 
signs  of  life  about  him  still,  and  to  suc- 
ceed in  her  dutiful  attempt  to  revive  him! 
A  woman  had  been  brought  to  the  altar 
by  her  husband,  and  they  compelled  her 
to  offer  sacrifice  by  holding  her  hands, 
but  she  cried,  "I  did  it  not!  I  did  it 
not!"  and  she  was  accordingly  con- 
demned to  banishment.*  We  read  of  con- 
fessors of  the  faith  at  Carthage,  who  Avere 
in  prison,  and  whom  they  had  en- 
deavoured for  eight  days  to  bring  to  re- 
cantation through  heat,  through  hunger 
and  thirst,  but  who  still  looked  death  by 
starvation  in  the  face  unmoved.t  Some 
confessors  from  Rome,  who  had  endured 
a  year's  confinement,  wrote  to  Cyprian 
thus  :J  "What  can  happen  to  a  man  more 
glorious  and  more  blessed,  than  amidst 
tortures,  and  even  in  the  sight  of  death, 
to  acknowledge  God  the  Lord,  and  with 
lacerated  body,  with  a  departing  but  a  free 
spirit,  to  acknowledge  Christ  the  Son  of 
God,  and  to  become  a  fellow-sufferer  of 


♦  Cyprian,  Ep.  xviii. 

f  Ep.  xxi.  Luciani,  ap.  Cyprian. 

^  Ep.  xxvi. 


78 

Christ  in  the  name  of  Christ.  We  have 
not  yet  shed  our  blood,  but  we  are  ready 
to  shed  it!  Pray  also,  dearest  Cyprian! 
that  the  Lord  may  daily  more  richly  con- 
firm and  strengthen  every  one  among  us 
with  the  powers  of  his  might,  and  that 
He,  our  great  leader,  may  at  length  lead 
to  the  battle-field  of  the  fight  that  is  set 
before  us,  his  warriors  whom  He  hath 
hitherto  practised,  and  proved  in  the  camp 
of  a  prison.  May  He  bestow  upon  us 
those  divine  arms,  which  never  can  be 
conquered  !"* 

The  bishops  were  the  especial  objects 
of  tiie  emperor's  hatred,  and  possibly  it 
was  only  against  them  that  the  punish- 
ment of  death  was  expressly  decreed.  At 
the  very  first  outbreaking  of  the  persecu- 
tion, Fabianus,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  suf- 
fered martyrdom.  Many  bishops,  till  the 
first  fury  of  the  persecution  had  subsided, 
retired  from  their  communities,  not  from 
cowardice,  but  because,  as  their  presence 
inflamed  the  fury  of  the  heathen,  they 
esteemed  it  their  duty  to  secure  the  repose 
of  their  communities  by  a  temporary  ab- 
sence, as  well  as  by  all  means  not  incon- 
sistent with  their  Christian  faith  and  pas- 
toral duties,  to  preserve  their  lives  for  the 
future  service  of  their  flocks,  and  of  the 
Church.  Among  the  number  of  those 
who  retired  for  a  season,  was  the  bishop 
Cyprian :  and  although  he  was  by  many 
reproached  as  having  done  this  from  cow- 
ardice, yet  his  subsequent  conduct  clears 
him  from  this  imputation,  and  the  open- 
ness and  the  tranquillity  of  conscience 
with  which  he  speaks  of  it,  are  creditable 
witnesses  in  his  favour,  when  he  writes 
thus  to  the  Roman  Church  :f  "  Imme- 
diately on  the  first  approach  of  trouble, 
when  the  people  with  loud  outcries  con- 
stantly demanded  my  death,  I  retired  for 
a  time,  not  so  much  from  care  for  my 
own  life,  as  for  the  public  tranquillity  of 
the  brethren,  that  the  tumult  which  had 
begun  might  not  be  further  excited  by 
ray  presence,  which  was  offensive  to  the 
heathcii."j  He  acted  after  the  principle 
which  he  recommended  in  regard  to  all 
other  persons  also.  "•  Therefore,  the  Lord 
commanded  us  to  yield  and  fly  in  case  of 
persecution ;  He  commanded  this,  and 
practised  it  himself.  For  as  the  martyr's 
crown  comes  from  the  grace  of  God,  and 
can  only  be  received  when  the  proper 
time  is  come,  so  he  denies  not  the  faith, 


MANY    BISHOPS    WITHDRAW. 


*  Ephes.  vi.  11. 

f  Epist  xiv.;  fEp.  xx.  in  Bishop  Fell's  edi- 
tion.   Oxford,  1682.— H.  J.  R.] 
4  De  Lapsis. 


who,  still  remaining  true  to  Christ,  retires 
occasionally,  but  he  waits  his  time." 
There  was,  however,  certainly  a  difl^erence 
in  the  case  of  ordinary  Christians,  and  of 
one  who  had  the  administration  of  the 
pastoral  oflfice  on  his  hands,  and  duties  to 
fulfil  towards  the  souls  confided  to  his 
care ;  but  even  this  Cyprian  neglected 
not ;  he  might  fairly  appeal  to  his  Church 
and  say,  that  though  absent  in  body  he 
had  been  present  with  them  constantly  in 
spirit,  and  sought  to  guide  them  by  coun- 
sel and  by  deed,  according  to  the  com- 
mandments of  the  Lord.*  The  letters 
which  he  wrote  from  his  retreat,  through 
the  means  of  clergy,  who  travelled  about, 
and  were  connected  with  his  Church, 
show  with  what  right  he  could  say  this 
of  himself,  and  with  what  anxiety  he 
sought  to  preserve  discipline  and  order  in 
the  Church,  and  how  desirous  he  was, 
that  the  necessities  of  the  poor,  who  were 
prevented  by  the  persecution  from  plying 
their  customary  employments,  should  be 
attended  to,  and  that  the  prisoners  should 
be  relieved  by  all  possible  means.  The 
same  principles  of  Christian  resolution, 
which  moved  him  to  yield  to  the  momen- 
tary danger,  were  shown  in  his  exhorta- 
tions to  his  Church,  when  in  exhorting 
them  to  Christian  steadfastness,  he  endea- 
voured to  warn  them  against  all  enthu- 
siastic and  exaggerated  feelings.  He  thus 
writes  to  his  clergyf  (Ep.  iv.):  "I  pray 
you  not  to  allow  your  prudence  and  care 
for  the  maintenance  of  tranquillity  to  fail ; 
for,  although  the  brethren,  in  the  spirit  of 
love  and  charity,  are  desirous  to  visit 
those  glorious  confessors  of  the  faith, 
whom  the  grace  of  God  has  rendered  il- 
lustrious by  such  a  glorious  beginning, 
yet  this  must  be  done  with  precaution, 
and  not  in  great  numbers  at  a  time,  lest 
we  provoke  the  jealousy  of  the  heathen, 
and  all  access  be  forbidden  ;  and  so  while 
we  seek  for  much,  we  lose  every  thing. 
Take  care  also  that  due  moderation  he 
kept  here  for  greater  security,  so  that  the 
individual  priests  who  go  to  administer 
the  communion  to  the  confessors,  and 
the  deacons  who  accompany  them,  may 
change  after  some  regular  succession, 
because  a  change  of  persons,  and  a  change 
in  those  who  visit  the  confessors,  will 
excite  less  jealousy;  and  in  every  thing 
we  must  gently  and  humbly,  as  becomes 
the  servants  of  God,  humour  the  times, 
and  provide  for  the  safety  and  tranquillity 

•  Ep.  xiv.  [Ep.  XX.  Ed.  Ox.] 

j  [Ep.v.     Bishop  Fell's  edition.— H.  J.  R.J 


THE  PERSECUTION  GRADUALLY  INCREASES. 


79 


of  the  Church."  He  desires  liis  Church 
to  consider  this  persecution  as  an  exhor- 
tation to  prayer.  (Ep.  vii.)  ''Let  each  of 
us  pray  to  God,  not  only  lor  himseir,  but 
for  all  the  brethren,  as  the  Lord  taught  us 
to  pray;  who  does  not  command  each 
individual  to  pray  for  himself  alone,  but 
all  generally  for  all.  When  the  Lord 
shall  see  that  we  are  humble  and  peace- 
able, united  among  ourselves,  and  ren- 
dered better  by  these  present  sufferings, 
then  will  He  free  us  from  the  persecutions 
of  the  enemy." 

By  a  comparison  of  the  various  letters 
of  Cyprian,  written  at  this  time,  with  the 
letter  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  it  ap- 
pears probable  that,  without  any  further 
edicts  of  the  emperor  Decius,  the  perse- 
cution had  gradually  become  more  severe. 
As  so  many  had  shown  weakness  at  the 
first  threats,  it  was  hoped  that  the  Chris- 
tians might  easily  be  entirely  crushed, 
without  proceeding  to  extremities,  if  they 
could  only  manage  to  deprive  them  of 
their  bishops,  who  were  constantly  in- 
flaming their  zeal  for  the  faith.  At  first  all 
the  dealings  with  the  Christians  in  this 
business  were  committed  to  those  local 
authorities  in  the  different  provinces,  who 
were  the  best  acquainted  with  the  indi-^ 
vidual  citizens,  and  best  knew  how  to  set 
about  the  matter,  and  who  would  know 
how  to  discover  the  means  most  likely  to 
work  upon  and  influence  each  man  ac- 
cording to  his  individual  character  and 
private  relations;  the  most  severe  punish- 
ments at  first  made  use  of,  were  imprison- 
ment and  banishment.  When,  however, 
the  heathen  saw  that  the  hopes  excited 
by  their  success  at  first,  were  deceived, 
the  proconsuls  themselves  took  the  thing 
into  their  own  hands;  and  those,  there- 
fore, by  whose  firmness  these  hopes  had 
been  dispelled,  were  now  far  more  liarshly 
dealt  with,  in  order  to  force  them  to  give 
way,  as  the  others  had  done.  They  tried 
hunger  and  thirst,  exquisite  and  increa- 
sing, tortures,  and  in  some  cases  death, 
even  on  those  who  were  not  spiritual  per- 
sdfcs.  [t  was,  however,  natural,  that  in 
the  course  of  time  people  should  grow 
weary  of  their  fury,  and  their  passion 
should  gradually  cool.  It  might  also 
happen  that  the  change  in  the  provincial 
government,  when  the  old  proconsuls  and 
praesides  laid  down  their  office  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  year  251,  might  be  favour- 
able to  the  Christians.  At  length  Decius 
was  called  away  from  the  persecution  of 
the  Christians,  by  more  important  political 
events,  the  rebellion  in  Macedonia,  and  the 


Gothic  war.  He  himself  lost  his  life  in 
this  war  towards  the  end  of  the  year. 
The  tranquillity  which  this  change  pro- 
cured for  the  Christians,  lasted  also  during 
a  part  of  the  following  year  252,  under 
the  government  of  Gallus  and  Volusianus. 
But  a  desolating  pestilence,  which  having 
broken  out  under  the  former  government, 
was  now  spreading  itself  gradually  into 
all  parts  of  the  Roman  empire,  with 
droughts  and  famine  in  various  districts, 
again  excited,  as  usual,  the  fury  of  the 
populace  against  the  Christians.*  An  im- 
perial edict  was  published,  requiring  all 
Roman  subjects  to  sacrifice  to  the  gods, 
in  order  to  obtain  salvation  from  so  great 
a  public  calamity."!"  Men  were  again 
struck  by  the  numbers  who  withdrew 
themselves  from  these  sacrifices,  because 
they  were  Christians.  Hence  arose  new 
persecutions,  in  order  to  increase  the 
number  of  the  sacrificers,  and  generally 
to  further  the  interests  of  the  old  religion. 
At  the  approach  of  this  new  persecu- 
tion. Bishop  Cyprian  wrote  a  letter  of 
exhortation^  (Ep.  Ivi.)  to  the  North  Afri- 
can Church  of  the  Thibaritans,  in  which 
he  thus  expresses  himself:  "Let  none  of 
you,  my  beloved  brethren,  when  he  sees 
how  our  people  are  driven  away  and  scat- 
tered from  fear  of  the  persecution,  dis- 
quiet himself,  because  he  no  longer  sees 
the  brethren  together,  nor  hears  the 
bishops  preach.  We,  who  dare  not  shed 
blood,  but  are  ready  to  allow  our  blood 
to  be  shed,  cannot,  at  such  a  time,  be  col- 
lected together.  Wheresoever,  in  those 
days,  any  one  of  the  brethren  may  be 
separated  for  a  while  by  the  necessities 
of  the  time,  and  absent  in  body,  not  in 
spirit,  let  him  not  be  agitated  by  the 
dreadfulness  of  that  flight ;  and  if  he  be 
obliged  to  retire  and  hide  himself,  let  not 
the  solitude  of  a  desert  place  terrify  him. 
He,  whom  Christ  accompanies  in  his 
flight,  is  not  alone ;  he  is  not  alone, 
who  preserving  God's  temple  constantly, 
wheresoever  he  is,  is  not  without  God. 
And  if  in  desert  places,  and  on  the  moun- 
tains, a  robber  shall  assault  the  fugitive,  a 
wild  beast  attack  him,  or  hunger,  thirst  or 
cold  destroy  him ;  or  if,  when  he  passes 
over  the  sea  in  haste,  the  fury  of  the 
storm  shall  sink  his  vessel,  yet  Christ, 
in  every  place,  beholds  his  warrior 
fighting !" 


*  See  Cyprian's  Defence  of  the  Christians 
against  the  accusations  of  Demctrianns. 

-(-  Cypriani  Epist.  Iv.  ad.  Corrul.  Sacrificia, 
qua;  edicto  proposito  celehrare  populus  jubebatur. 

+  [Ep.  Iviii.  cd.  Ox.  1682.] 


80 


PERSECUTION   UNDER   VALERIANUS. 


The  bishops  of  the  metropolis,  under 
the  very  eyes  of  the  emperor,  were  natu- 
rally the  first  objects  of  the  persecution, 
for  how  could  people  hope  to  put  down 
Christians  in  the  provinces,  while  they 
suffered  their  Bishops  to  remain  in  Rome  ? 
Cornelius  who  had  entered  on  his  office 
under  Decius,  at  the  danger  of  his  life, 
■was  at  first  banished,  and  then  condemned 
to  death.  Lucius,  who  had  the  Christian 
courage  to  succeed  him  in  his  office,  at 
this  time  of  danger,  was  soon  also  his  fol- 
lower in  banishment  and  in  martyrdom. 

Nevertheless,  the  war  and  the  rebellion, 
with  which  Gallus  was  busied,  prevented 
him  from  carrying  through  with  vigour  a 
general  persecution  of  the  Christians  in 
the  provinces,  and  these  events,  which 
ended  with  his  murder,  in  the  summer  of 
tlie  year  253,  at  length  restored  universal 
repose  and  tranquillity  to  the  Christians. 

The  emperor  Valerianus,  in  the  first 
years  of  his  reign,  from  254,  showed  him- 
self very  favourable  to  the  Christians,  but 
from  the  year  257,  he  changed  his  con- 
duct, and  began  to  persecute  them.  The 
persecution,  however,  was  at  first  by  no 
means  a  bloody  one,  and  only  required 
the  removal  of  teachers  and  pastors,  and 
especially  bishops,  from  their  flocks.  We 
have  before  observed  the  notion  which  in 
the  former  persecution  prevailed  among 
the  heathen  governors,  that  if  they  could 
first  remove  the  bishops  out  of  the  way, 
they  should  have  less  difficulty  in  strang- 
ling Christianity ;  then  the  assembling  of 
the  congregations  was  forbidden,  and  it 
was  hoped  that  thus  their  aim  might  be 
attained  without  bloodshed.  The  course 
of  proceeding  in  this  first  persecution 
under  this  emperor  we  ascertain  immedi- 
ately by  an  inspection  of  the  minutes  of 
the  trials  of  the  bishops  Cyprian  and 
Dionysius.*  Tlie  proconsul  Paternus 
brought  Cyprian  before  his  tribunal,  and 
said  to  him,  "  The  emperors  Valerianus 
and  Galienus  have  sent  me  a  rescript,  in 
which  they  command  that  all  those  who 
do  not  observe  the  Roman  religion,  shall 
now  take  upon  them  the  Roman  ceremo- 
nies. I  therefore  ask  what  are  you .? 
what  do  you  answer .'"  Cyprian :  "  I  am 
a  Christian  and  a  bishop;  I  know  no 
God  but  the  one  true  God,  who  created 
the  heaven  aiul  the  earth  and  the  sea,  and 
all  that  is  in  them.  This  God  we  Chris- 
tians serve  ;  to  this  God  we  pray  day  and 
night  for  ourselves;  for  all  mankind,  and 
for  the  prosperity  of  the  emperor  him- 


self."     The  proconsul :    "  Is  this,  then, 


[Passio  Sti  Cypriani— H.  J.  R.] 


your  fixed  resolution  .^"  Cyprian  :  "  A 
good  resolution,  which  proceeds  from  the 
knowledge  of  God,  can  never  change.'" 
The  proconsul  on  this,  in  compliance 
with  the  imperial  edict,  pronounced  a  sen- 
tence of  banishment  upon  him,  and  added 
instandy,  "  this  rescript  relates  not  only 
to  the  bishops,  but  also  to  the  priests.  [ 
desire,  therefore,  to  know  from  you,  who 
the  presbyters  are  who  dwell  in  this  city  .^" 
Cyprian:  "Your  laws  have  justly  con- 
demned the  laying  of  informations  ;  I  can- 
not, therefore,  give  them  up;  but  in  the 
places  over  which  they  have  authority, 
you  will  be  able  to  find  them."  The 
proconsul :  "  J  am  speaking  now  of  this 
place,  and  in  this  place,  this  very  day, 
will  I  begin  the  search."  Cyprian  :  ''  As 
our  doctrine  forbids  men  to  give  them- 
selves up,  and  it  is  also  contrary  to  your 
orders,  therefore  they  cannot  give  them- 
selves up  ;  but  if  you  seek  them  you  will 
find  them."  The  proconsul  released  him 
with  a  declaration,  that  the  assembling  of 
the  Christians,  be  it  where  it  might,  and 
the  visiting  Christian  places  of  interment 
(which  usually  inflamed  the  zeal  of  Chris- 
tians,) were  forbidden  under  pain  of  death. 
^The  intention  was  now  wholly  to  sepa- 
rate the  bishops  from  their  churches,  but 
the  bond  of  the  Spirit  would  not  suffer 
itself  to  be  broken  by  earthly  power.  We 
very  soon  after  find  the  bishops  and  the 
clergy,  and  not  only  these,  but  laymen 
also,  and  even  women  and  children,  con- 
demned, after  being  ill-treated  and  beaten, 
to  imprisonment  and  to  labour  in  the 
mines  :  we  suppose  they  had  been  found 
at  the  graves,  or  in  congregations.  The 
bishop  Cyprian,  from  Curubis,  the  place 
of  his  banishment,  was  most  active  in  pro- 
viding for  their  temporal  and  spiritual 
wants,  and  in  proving,  by  words  and  deeds 
of  love,  his  sympathy  with  them.  Wliile 
he  sent  large  sums  from  his  own  revenues 
and  from  the  church-chest,  for  their  sup- 
port, and  for  the  relief  of  their  distresses, 
he  wrote  thus  to  them  (Ep.  Ixxvii.  :)*  "  In 
the  mines  the  body  is  not  refreshed  by 
bed  and  couches,  but  by  the  refreshment 
and  the  consolation  of  Christ.  The  limbs, 
weary  through  labour,  lie  upon  the  earth, 
but  it  is  no  punishment  to  lie  there  with 
Christ.  Though  the  outward  man  be 
covered  with  filth,  yet  the  inward  man  is 
the  more  purified  by  the  Spirit  of  God. 

•  [Ep:  Ixxvi.  cd.  Oxon,  1682.  This  is  by  a 
misprint  in  the  edition  here  referred  to  made 
Ixxxvi.,  but  in  the  Index  it  is  given  as  it  should  be, 
as  the  Ixxvith.— H.  J.  R.] 


INCREASE    OF    CHRISTIANITY CRUEL    EDICT. 


81 


There  is  but  little  bread,  but  man  lives  not 
by  bread  alone,  but  by  the  word  of  God. 
There  is  but  little  clothing  for  the  cold, 
but  he  who  has  put  on  Christ,  hath 
clothiu]^  and  ornament  enough.  *  *  *  * 
Even  in  this,  my  dearest  brethren,  your 
faith  can  recieve  no  injury,*  that  you  are 
unable  to  celebrate  the  communion.  You 
do  celebrate  the  most  glorious  commu- 
nion, you  do  bring  God  the  most  costly 
oiroring,  for  the  Scripture  says,  'The  sa- 
crilice  of  God  is  a  broken  spirit ;  a  contrite 
heart  God  doth  not  despise.'  You  bring 
yourselves  as  holy  and  pure  offerings  to 
God.  Your  example,"  he  writes  to  the 
clergy,  "  the  greater  part  of  the  Church 
has  followed,  who  have  confessed  with 
you,  and  with  you  been  crowned,  being 
bound  to  you  by  the  ties  of  the  strongest 
love,  so  that  prison  and  the  mines  could 
not  separate  them  from  you,  and  there  are 
among  you  even  girls  and  boys.  How 
great  now  among  you  must  be  the  strength 
of  your  victorious  conscience!  What  a 
triumph  in  your  hearts,  to  walk  among 
the  mines,  with  imprisoned  body,  but 
with  a  heart  conscious  of  power,  to  know 
tliat  Christ  is  among  you,  and  delights 
himself  in  the  patience  of  his  servants, 
who  tread  in  his  footsteps  and  walk  in 
his  ways  to  the  kingdom  of  eternity  !" 

The  emperor  must  soon  have  found, 
that  nothing  could  be  accomplished  by 
these  measures.  The  local  separation  of 
the  bishops  could  not  break  up  their  con- 
nection with  the  Churches ;  by  letters, 
by  clergy  travelling  backwards  and  for- 
wards, they  were  active  among  their  peo- 
ple, as  if  they  had  been  in  the  midst  of 
them,  and  their  exile  only  rendered  them 
dearer  to  their  Churches.  Wherever  they 
were  banished,  they  collected  a  little  con- 
gregation around  them ;  in  many  places, 
where  as  yet  no  seed  of  the  Gospel  liad 
been  sown,  the  kingdom  of  God  was  first 
erected  by  these  banislied  persons,  whose 
lives,  and  not  their  lips  alone  gave  wit- 
ness to  their  faith.  So  the  Bishop  Dio- 
nysius  was  able  to  say  of  his  banishment 
to  Cephar,  a  remote  place  of  Libya,|  "At 
first  we  were  persecuted  and  stoned,  but 
then  not  a  few  of  the  heathen  left  their 
idols  and  turned  to  God.  By  us  the  seed 
of  the  word  was  first  brought  thither;  and, 
as  if  God  had  brought  us  thither  only  for 


*  [Dr.  N.  has  here  only  paraphrased  the  orgi- 
nal,  "  quad  illic  nunc  xaccrr/otibtis  Dei  facultas  non 
datur  eiferendi  et  celebrandi  sacrificia  divina,"  and 
so  throughout  this  passage  the  original  is  much 
abridged.-H.  J.  U.] 

t  Euseb.  vii.  11. 

11 


that  purpose,  he  led  us  away  again  as 
soon  as  we  had  fulfilled  that  purpose." 
Valerianus,  therefore,  believed  that  to  sup- 
press Cliristianity,  he  must  resort  to  more 
decided  and  severe  measures.  In  the  fol- 
lowing year,  258,  appeared  this  edict: — 
"The  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  shall 
immediately  be  put  to  death  by  the  sword, 
the  senators  and  knights  shall  lose  their 
dignities  and  property,  and  if,  after  this, 
they  remain  Christians,  they  shall  suffer 
the  same  punishment  of  death.  Women 
of  condition,  after  confiscation  of  their 
property,  shall  be  banished ;  the  Chris- 
tians in  the  service  of  the  imperial  court, 
especially  slaves  and  freedmen,  who  have 
formerly  made  profession  of  Christianity, 
or  do  so  now,  shall  be  considered  as  the 
property  of  the  emperor,  and  shall  be* 
distributed  in  chains  to  labour  in  the  va- 
rious imperial  public  works."  We  see 
by  this  rescript,!  that  the  emperor's  pe- 
culiar object  was,  to  deprive  the  Christians 
of  their  c/ergy,  and  to  stop  the  spread  of 
Christianity  among  the  higher  orders.  He 
did  not  wish  to  use  unnecessary  cruelty ; 
but  clearly  the  people  and  the  governors 
did  not  always  abide  by  the  spirit  of  these 
instructions,  as  we  learn  from  some  of  the 
martyrdoms  of  this  persecution,  against 


*  A  various  reading  here  gives  the  sense  of 
branded  besides.     [See  the  necst  note.] 

■|-  The  original  rescript  of  llie  etnperor  to  the 
senate,  is  found  in  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixxxii.  ad  Suc- 
cessum,  (Ep.  Ixxx.  ed.  Ox.)  "Ut  episcopi  etpres- 
liyteri  et  diacones  in  continenti  animadvertantur, 
senatores  vcro  et  egregii  viri  et*  (the  second  et  is 
a  spurious  addition,  for  the  egregii  viri  are  the 
cqxtites  as  the  senatores  are  clarissimi)  dignitate 
amissa  etiam  bonis  spolientur,  et  si,  ademptis  fa- 
cultatibus.  Christian!  esse  perseveraverint,  capite 
quoque  mulctentur;  matronsB  vero,  ademptis  bonis, 
in  exsilium  relegentur ;  Ctesariani  autein  quicun- 
que  vel  prius  confessi  fuerant  vel  nunc  confessi 
fuerint,  confiscentur  et  vincti  in  Cssarianas  pos- 
sessiones  descripti  mittantur."  Instead  of  dc- 
scripti  (allotted  or  distributed,)  there  is  a  various 
reading ;  scripti  or  inscripti,  branded.  We  see 
by  the  following  passage  in  Pontius's  Life  of  Cy- 
prian, that  in  the  persecutions  of  Decius,  Chris- 
tians had  been  branded  on  the  forehead :  "  Tot 
confessores  frontium  notatarum  secunda  inscrip- 
tione  signatos."  The  "  prima  inscriptio"  was  the 
"  inscriptio  crusis,"  p^^^aKTH^,  <np^a.yi;  tcv  tPTMj^c-j  re- 
ceived in  baptism.  In  the  passage  of  Cyprian  the 
collocation  of  the  words  rather  favours  the  common 
reading. 

*  [I  find  the  passage  thus  printed  in  both  edi- 
tions of  Dr.  Neander.  It  appears  that  the  printer 
must  have  left  out  the  words  "  cquitcs  Romani,'' 
which  follow  the  second  el  in  the  passage  of 
Cyprian.  This  will  make  Dr.  Neander's  remark 
in  the  parenthesis  quite  intelligible.  But  he  may, 
perhaps,  mean  to  condemn  the  words  equilcs  Bo- 
matii  also. — H.  J.  R-] 


82 


CYPRIAN GALLIENUS HIS    EDICT    OF    TOLERATION. 


the  genuineness  of  which  no  cogent  ar- 
guments can,  upon  the  whole,  be  pro- 
duced. 

Sextus,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  four 
deacons  of  his  Church,  were  the  first  who, 
in  consequence  of  this  edict,  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom, on  the  6th  of  August,  A.  D.  258. 

The  new  governors  in  the  provinces 
had  in  the  interim  recalled  those  who  had 
been  banished  by  their  predecessors  in 
oflice,  and  they  allowed  them  in  the  re- 
tirement, in  which  they  were  obliged  to  j 
remain,  to  await  the  decision  of  their  fate 
by  the  new  rescript  which  was  expected 
from  Rome.  Cyprian  kept  himself  at  a 
small  country  place  near  Carthage,  until 
he  heard  that  he  would  be  conducted  to 
Utica,  in  order  to  receive  his  sentence 
from  the  proconsul,  who  happened  then 
to  be  staying  there.  Like  a  true  shepherd, 
he  was  most  anxious  to  give  his  last  tes- 
timony by  word  and  by  suffering  in  the 
presence  of  his  own  flock  ;  and  he,  there- 
fore, complied  with  the  entreaties  of  his 
friends  who  urged  him  to  retire  till  the 
return  of  the  proconsul.  From  the  place 
of  his  concealment,  he  wrote  his  last 
letter  to  his  Church.  (Ep.  Ixxxiii.)*  "  I 
allowed  myself  to  be  persuaded  to  with- 
draw for  a  time,  because  it  becomes  the 
bishop,  in  that  place  where  he  is  set  over 
the  Church  of  the  Lord,  to  confess  the 
Lord,  that  all  the  Church  may  be  ren- 
dered glorious  by  the  confession  of  their 
pastor.  For  whatsoever  the  confessing 
bishop  declares  in  the  moment  of  confes- 
sion, that  he  declares  by  the  inspiration 
of  God  from  the  mouths  of  all.  Let  me, 
in  this  retired  spot,  await  the  return  of 
the  proconsul  to  Carthage,  to  hear  from 
him,  what  the  emperors  have  commanded 
in  relation  to  the  Christian  bishops  and 
laity,  and  to  speak  to  him  what  the  Lord 
in  that  hour  will  that  I  should  speak. 
But  you,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  keep 
peace  and  tranquillity  in  conformity  with 
the  discipline  whicli  you  have  always 
received  at  my  hands,  according  to  the 
commands  of  tlie  Lord  -,  let  no  one  of  you 
bring  the  brethren  into  trouble,  nor  give 
himself  up  of  his  own  accord  to  the  hea- 
then. Every  man  must  then  only  speak, 
^vhen  he  is  apprehended,  for  in  that  hour 
the  Lord  who  dwells  in  us,  speaks  in  us." 
When  Cyprian,  on  the  return  of  the  pro- 
consul on  the  14th  of  September,  received 
from  his  mouth  the  sentence  of  death, 
his  last  words  were  "  God  be  thanked."f 


*  Ep.  Ixxxi.  ed.  Oxon. 

•}■  He  was  condemned  as  an   "inimicus  Diis 


This  persecution  ended  with  the  reign 
of  him  from  whom  it  proceeded.  Vale- 
rianus,  by  the  unfortunate  issue  of  the 
war,  having  been  taken  prisoner  by  the 
Persians,  A.  D.  259,  his  son  Gallienus, 
already  joined  in  the  government,  obtained 
the  undivided  sovereignty.  He  was  more 
indifferent  than  his  father,  as  well  with 
respect  to  all  public  affairs,  as  with  regard 
to  the  maintenance  of  the  state  religon. 
He  instantly  published  an  edict,  by  which 
he  granted  to  the  Christians  the  {ree  ex- 
ercise of  their  religion,  and  commanded 
that  all  the  burial  grounds  belonging  to 
their  Churches,  and  the  otiier  houses  and 
grounds,  which  had  been  confiscated 
under  the  foregoing  government,  slioukl 
be  restored  to  tliem.  He  thus  recognised 
the  Christian  Church  as  a  legalhj  existing 
corporate  body^  for  none  but  such  a  body 
could,  according  to  the  Roman  constitu- 
tion, possess  a  common  property.  As, 
however,  Macrianus  had  set  himself  up 
for  emperor  in  the  east,  and  in  Egypt,  in 
these  countries  it  was  only  till  after  his 
fall,  in  A.  D.  261,  that  the  toleration  edict 
of  Gallienus  could  come  into  effect.* 
Hence,  while  the  Christians  in  the  West 
were  already  in  the  enjoyment  of  repose, 
persecutions  may  have  lasted  in  those 
countries  in  compliance  wth  the  edict  of 
Valerianus.  Eusebins  relates  a  remark- 
able instance  of  this,  which  took  place  at 
this  time  in  Palestine.  Marius,  a  Chris- 
tian soldier  at  Coesarea  Stratonis,  was  to 
receive  the  place  of  a  centurion.  Just  as 
the  centurion's  staff  (the  vi/!is,)  was  about 
to  be  entrusted  to  him,  another  soldier, 
who  had  the  next  promise  of  this  promo- 
tion, stepped  forward  and  declared  that, 
according  to  the  old  laws,  Marius  could 
not  hold  any  Roman  military  ranli,  be- 
cause he  was  a  Cliristian,  and  did  not 
sacrifice  to  the  gods  and  to  the  emperor. 
On  this  they  granted  Marius  a  delay  of 
three  hours,  in  the  course  of  which  he 
must  decide  v)hcthcr  he  rooiild  remain  a 
Christian.  In  the  meantime  tlie  bishop 
Theotecnus  led  him  to  the  Church,  he 
pointed  on  the  one  hand  to  the  sword 
which  the  soldier  bore  upon  his  side,  on 
the  other  to  the  book  of  the  Gospel, 
which  he  laid  before  him.  "  He  must 
choose   between    the   two,   between    the 


Komanis  et  sacris  legibus."  [So  Pontius  in  Vita 
Cypr.  p.  13.  Comp.  also  the  Passio  Cypriani. — 
H.  J.  K.] 

*  Euscinus,  vii.  13,  has  preserved  to  us,  not  the 
original  edict  of  this  emperor,  but  the  rescript,  by 
which  the  edict  was  introduced  also  into  Egypt, 
after  the  conquest  of  Macrian. 


CHRISTIANITY    A    RELIGIO    LICIT  A AURELIAN. 


83 


military  rank  and  the  Gospel  !"  Marius, 
without  hesitation,  lifted  up  his  right 
hand  and  laid  hold  of  the  Gospel.  "Now," 
said  the  bishop,  "hold  fast  on  God,  and 
mayest  thou  obtain  what  thou  hast  chosen. 
Depart  in  peace."  After  a  most  cou- 
rageous confession  he  was  beheaded. 

Tlie  law  of  Gallienus  must  necessarily 
have  wrouglit  a  change  in  the  condition 
of  die  Christians,  most  essential  in  itself, 
and  fraught  with  most  important  con- 
sequences. The  important  step,  which 
many  emperors,  more  favourable  to  Chris- 
tianity than  Gallienus,  who  can  hardly 
have  had  any  peculiar  religious  interest 
in  the  case,  had  never  hazarded,  was  now 
made.  Christianity  had  now  become  a 
"  religio  licita ;"  the  Christian  Church  had 
now  received  a  legal  existence;  and  many 
a  governor  who,  in  former  times,  under 
the  then  existing  laws,  would  have  had 
no  scruples  in  persecuting  the  Christians, 
would  now  dread  laying  his  hands  on  a 
corporate  body,  constitutionally  recog- 
nised. This  was  exactly  shown  in  the 
case  of  Lucius  Domitius  Aurelianus,  the 
next  emperor  but  one  to  Gallienus,  in  the 
year  270.  This  emperor  sprung  from  the 
lower  orders;  and,  educated  in  heathen 
superstition,  had,  from  the  beginning, 
scarcely  any  but  hostile  feelings  towards 
the  Christians ;  for  he  was  not  only  most 
fanatically  devoted  to  the  eastern  worship 
of  the  sun,  with  which  he  might  easily 
have  blended  a  toleration  of  many  foreign 
sacra,  but  he  \vas  in  every  respect  a  blind 
supporter  of  the  old  heathen  worship. 
The  welfare  of  the  state  appeared  to  him 
to  be  most  intimately  connected  with  the 
proper  performance  of  the  old  sacra. 
AVhen,  during  the  threatening  danger  of 
the  war  with  the  German  tribes,  some  of 
the  members  of  the  Roman  senate  had 
proposed  in  that  body,  that,  after  the  old 
custom,  the  sybilline  books  should  be 
opened,  and  their  counsel  asked,  some  of 
the  senators  said  that  there  was  no  need 
to  take  refuge  there;  the  power  of  the 
emperor  was  so  great,  that  there  was  no 
need  to  ask  counsel  of  the  gods.  The 
matter  dropped  for  this  time,  and  was  after- 
M'ards  again  taken  up  afresh.  But  the 
emperor,  who  might  very  well  have  heard 
of  these  transactions  in  the  senate,  ex- 
pressed his  displeasure,  and  wrote  to 
these  people  thus  :  *"  I  wonder  that  you 
should  have  hesitated  so  long  to  open  the 


"  These  words  seem  to  convey  a  suspicion,  that 
there  might  be  some  Christians  even  among  the 
senators  themselves,  and  that  they  had  influenced 
the  deliberations. 


sybilline  books,  as  if  you  had  been  con- 
sidting  in  a  Cliristian  Church,  and  not  in 
the  temple  of  all  the  gods."  He  called 
upon  them  to  support  him  by  religious 
ceremonies  of  every  kind;  for  it  could  be 
no  shame  to  conquer  with  the  help  of  the 
gods.  He  ofTered  to  defray  all  costs  in- 
curred by  the  ofiering  of  every  kind  of 
victim,  and  also  to  give  toicards  it  ]>riso7i- 
crs  from  all  nations^  and  thus  also,  human 
victims*  We  can  easily  perceive,  from 
these  circumstances,  that  tliis  emperor 
was  not  disinclined  to  shed  the  blood  of 
Christians  to  the  honour  of  his  gods ;  and 
that  from  the  dictates  of  his  own  spirit, 
he  would  be  disposed  towards  harsh  and 
severe  measures.  In  the  first  years  of  his 
reign,  however,  he  undertook  no  persecu- 
tion of  the  Christians.  He  even  showed 
by  his  conduct  on  one  occasion,  in  the 
third  year  of  his  reign,  that  he  considered 
the  Christian  Church  as  a  leg*dlly  existing 
corporation  ;  for  when  a  contention  having 
arisen  among  the  Christians  of  Antioch, 
who  should  be  the  bishop  of  that  place, 
the  Church  appealed  to  Uie  emperor  him- 
self, and  requested  that  the  bishop,  Paulus 
of  Samosata,  who  had  already  been  dis- 
placed on  account  of  his  doctrinal  opi- 
nions, but  had  hitherto  found  support  in 
Zenobia,  (who  was  now  conquered  by 
Aurelian,)  might  be  compelled  at  last  to 
lay  down  his  office,  this  emperor  decided 
that  he,  ivhom  the  bishop  of  Rome,  his 
court,  recognised,  should  be  the  bishop. 

It  was  in  the  year  275,  when  he  was 
busied  with  the  warlike  preparations  in 
Thrace,  that  he  first  determined  (probably 
to  show  his  thankfulness  to  the  gods,  who 
had  hitherto,  he  thought,  so  favoured  him, 
and  to  win  their  further  favour,)  to  banish 
all  his  scruples,  and  to  proceed  to  extre- 
mities against  the  Christians,  but  he  was 
murdered  in  a  conspiracy  before  he  could 
carry  his  plan  into  execution.! 

The  Christian  Church  remained  in  this 
state  of  repose  and  tranquillity  above  forty 
years,  and  the  number  of  Christians  in 
this  interval  increased  among  all  classes; 
but  among  the  multitude  of  those  who 


*  Flavius  Vopisc.  c.  x.^c. 

f  Eusebius  says  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History, 
that  Aurelianus  died  at  the  very  time  that  he  was 
about  to  publish  an  edict  against  the  Christians. 
In  the  book  De  Mortibus  Persecutorum,  the  story 
runs,  that  the  edict  had  been  published,  but  that 
it  could  not  reach  the  distant  provinces  of  the  em- 
pire before  the  death  of  the  emperor.  Other  writers 
iiiakethe  persecution  already  begun.  The  account 
of  Eusebius,  vviio  says  the  least,  is  by  far  the  most 
probable,  and  tiie  other  part  of  the  story  may  have 
arisen  from  exaggeration. 


84 


DIOCLETIAN'S    EDICT    AGAINST   THE    MANICHEES. 


embraced  Christianity  at  a  time  when  it 
required  no  struggle  to  be  and  to  remain 
a  Christian,  there  certainly  entered  also 
into  the  Christian  Church  many  counter- 
feit Christians,  wlio  brought  with  them 
heathenish  crimes.  The  outward  form  of 
the  Christian  Church  was  also  changed, 
in  consequence  of  their  greater  prosperity, 
and  in  the  large  towns  splendid  churches 
succeeded  the  former  modest  and  simple 
houses  of  assembly.  The  emperor  Dio- 
cletian, who  reigned  from  the  year  284,  at 
first  alone,  but  from  the  year  286  in  con- 
junction with  Maximianus  Herculius, 
showed  himself,  at  least  as  far  as  external 
appearances  go,  no  other  than  favourable 
to  Christians,  for  the  relations  of  the  per- 
secutions in  the  earlier  years  of  this  em- 
peror's government,  are  at  variance  with  i 
credible  historical  documents,  and  are  [ 
altogether  unworthy  of  credit.  Christians 
were  employed  in  offices  of  importance 
in  the  imperial  court ;  some  were  found 
among  the  eunuchs  and  chamberlains  (cu-  ! 
bicularii ;)  from  which,  however,  we  are  I 
not  entitled  to  infer  that  the  emperor  had 
any  particular  partiality  for  the  Christians ; 
for  there  had  been  for  a  long  time  some  ' 
Christians  among  the  Caesariani,  and  if  at ; 
first  only  one  of  these  was  a  Christian, 
yet  he  would  probably  use  his  influence, 
as  well  as  that  Lucius,  who  having  ob-  | 
tained  the  confidence  of  the  emperor,  was 
made  by  him  the  Praepositus  Cubicula- 
riorum,  to  extend  Christianity  among  the 
people  of  the  court.*     These  Christians 

*  Theonas,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  who  gave 
this  Lucius  much  excellent  advice  as  to  the  duties 
of  his  office,  charges  liim  particularly  not  to  be 
lifted  up  and  to  pride  himself,  because  many  in  the 
palace  of  the  prince  had  been  brought  to  a  know- 
ledge of  the  truth  through  him,  but  far  rather  to 
give  God  thanks  that  He  had  made  him  the  instru- 
ment of  a  good  work.  But  we  cannot  here  deter- 
mine with  certainty  that  this  emperor  was  Diocle- 
tian. At  all  events  it  is  quite  clear  that  the  em- 
peror, in  whose  court  he  was,  was  no  Christian;  it 
is  not  even  clear,  that  he  had  any  prevailing  incli- 
nation to  Christianity,  but  only  that  there  were 
hopes  of  winning  him  over  to  the  cause  by  means 
of  his  chamberlain.  The  Christians,  about  the 
court  were  recommended  to  use  the  utmost  pre- 
caution, not  to  offend  the  heathen  emperor.  If  a 
Christian  was  appointed  librarian,  he  was  to  take 
good  care  not  to  show  any  contempt  for  worldly 
knowledge  and  the  old  authors ;  he  was  to  recog- 
nise the  excellence  of  the  poets,  philosophers,  ora- 
tors, and  historians  of  old,  taking  into  considera- 
tion the  condition  under  which  they  lived,  but  then 
he  was  sometimes  to  take  an  opportunity  of  prais- 
ing the  Scriptures,  to  mention  Christ,  and  by  de- 
grees to  liint  that  He  is  the  only  true  God.  In- 
surgere  poterit  Christi  mentio,  explicabitur  paul- 
lat'uii  ejus  sola  divinitas.     Omnia  hsec  cum  Chriti 


immediately  around  the  emperor  might 
also  have  great  eflfect  in  rendering  him 
favourable  to  their  fellow-believers. 

It  was  always  a  notion  near  the  heart 
of  the  Roman  statesman,  that  the  old  po- 
litical glory  of  the  Roman  empire  was 
closely  dependent  on  the  old  state  religion, 
and  that  the  former  could  never  be  re- 
stored without  the  latter.  As  Diocletian, 
therefore,  wished  again  to  renew  the 
former  splendour  of  the  Roman  empire, 
it  might  appear  to  him  necessary  for  that 
end,  to  restore  the  old  religion,  which 
was  daily  sinking  into  neglect,  and  to  ex- 
tirpate the  un-Roman  religion,  which  was 
constantly  spreading  wider  and  wider,  and 
which  threatened  at  last  to  attain  an  un- 
divided sway  in  the  world.  In  a  later 
inscription,  in  which  the  emperor  prides 
himself  on  the  annihilation  of  Christianity, 
the  Christians  are  accused  of  destroying 
the  state.*  In  the  edict  by  which  Galerius, 
the  instigator  of  the  persecution,  after- 
ward.^ countermanded  it,  he  declares  that 
it  had  been  the  intention  of  the  emperors 
to  correct  every  thing  after  the  old  laws 
and  the  public  constitution  of  the  Roman 
state.l  Persuaded  a.?  the  emperor  Avas  of 
this,  he  cannot  have  been  restrained  from 
persecuting  the  Christians  by  any  just 
notion  of  the  general  rights  of  man,  of 
the  limits  of  the  power  of  the  states  in 
matters  of  conscience,  nor  by  more  just 
views  of  the  nature  of  religion.  This  is 
proved  by  the  principles  which  he  declares 
in  a  law  against  the  sect  of  the  Manichees, 
A.  D.  296,  which  was  especially  obnoxious 
to  him  on  account  of  its  being  derived 
from  his  enemies  the  Persians.  "The 
immortal  gods,"  says  he,J  "  have,  by  their 
providence,  ordained  and  established  that 
which  is  true  and  good.  Many  wise  and 
good  men  are  imited  in  the  opinion  that 
this  must  be  maintained  without  altera- 
tion. These  we  dare  not  oppose,  and  no 
new  religion  ought  to  venture  to  blame 
the  old ;  for  it  is  an  enormous  crime  to 
pull  down  that  which  our  forefathers  es- 
tablished, and  which  has  dominion  in  the 

adjutorio  provenire  possent.  Galland.  Bibl.  Patr. 
T.  iv. 

*  Christiani,  qui  rempublicam  evertebant. 

j-  Nos  quidem  volueramus  juxta  leges  veteres  et 
publicam  disciplinam  Romanorum  cunctacorrigere. 

t  This  edict,  which  was  known  to  Hilarius,  the 
author  of  the  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  bears  every  internal  mark  of  genuineness, 
and  one  is  at  a  loss  to  imagine  any  motive,  which 
should  induce  either  a  Christian  or  a  heathen  to 
invent  .luch  an  edict.  The  extension  of  the  re- 
ligion in  Africa,  which  it  declares,  is  not  at  all  a 
matter  of  impossibility. 


REASONS    OP    GALERIUS    FOR  NOT   PERSECUTING   THE    CHRISTIANS.       85 


state."*  Must  not  the  principles  here 
professed  have  made  Diocletian  an  enemy 
and  a  persecutor  of  Christianity } 

The  grounds,  however,  on  which,  (ac- 
cording to  the  judgment  of  the  book,  de 
Mortibus  Persecutorum)  the  emperor  af- 
terwards opposed  his  son-in-law  on  their 
meeting  at  Nicomedia,  which  was  just 
about  to  take  place,  might,  perhaps,  in 
conjunction  with  the  personal  influence 
of  people  immediately  about  him,  have 
withheld  him  from  a  persecution  of  the 
Christians;  namely,  that  the  Christians 
had  now  long  since  become  a  legally  ex- 
isting religious  society,  that  they  were  so 
M  idely  spread,  that  so  much  blood  would 
necessarily  be  shed,  that  the  public  tran- 
quillity would  immediately  be  disturbed, 
and  that  all  former  bloodshed  liad  rather 
had  the  eflect  of  furthering  the  progress 
of  Christianity,  than  of  repressing  it. 
Although  Diocletian  wished  to  restore 
the  old  Roman  religion,  he  would  proba- 
bly never  have  overcome  these  objections, 
had  not  a  more  powerful  motive  carried 
him  on. 

The  heathen  must  have  seen  the  season 
of  the  downfall  of  their  old  temples,  and 
of  the  dominion  of  Christianity,  which 
they  detested,  daily  approaching  nearer 
and  nearer,  and  they  must  have  set  all 
their  engines  to  work  to  obtain  this  latter 
determination,  (the  determination  to  per- 
secute Christianity.)  This  last  struggle 
of  heathenism  against  Christianity  would 
necessarily,  from  the  very  nature  of  things, 
become  the  most  violent  and  passionate. 
The  heathen  party,  to  which  statesmen 
and  priests,  and  men  who  aspired  to  be 
philosophers,  as  Hierocles,!  belonged, 
required  only  a  powerful  instrument  to 
obtain  their  ends.  They  found  one  in 
the  son-in-law  of  Diocletian,  the  emperor 
Caius  Galerius  Maximianus.  This  prince 
had  raised  himself,  by  his  military  abilities, 
from  a  low  condition ;  he  had  been  edu- 
cated in  blind  heathen  superstition,  and 
was  devoted  to  it,  and  attached  great  vir- 
tue to  sacrifices  and  auspices.  When  he 
made  use  of  these  in  war,  and  Christian 
officers  were  present,  they  were  accus- 
tomed, from  the  persuasion  that  the  hea- 
thens in  their  idols  worshipped  evil  spirits, 
which  seduce  men  from  God,  to  sign 
themselves  with    the   cross   in   order  to 


ward  off  the  influence  of  evil  spirits, 
by  the  presumed  supernatural  power  of 
this  token  of  Christ's  victory  over  all 
the  empire  of  evil.  The  heathen  priests 
also  agreed  to  this  notion  of  the  Chris- 
tians, but  on  wholly  diflerent  grounds  in- 
asmuch as  they  said  "  that  the  gods  were 
no  longer  present  at  the  sacrifices,  not 
because  they  feared  the  cross,  but  because 
this  hostile  and  profane  sign  was  hateful 
to  them  ;"  an  argument  which  they  may 
have  used,  because  they  believed  it,  or 
perhaps  have  made  use  of  only  as  a  pre- 
tence to  excuse  auguries  and  predictions 
that  had  failed,  and  to  embitter  the  emperor 
still  more  against  the  Christians.  By 
these,  they  said,  the  good  fortune  and 
success  of  all  heathen  ''sacra"  were  pre- 
vented.* 

There  had  been,  till  now,  many  Chris- 
tians in  the  army,  both  in  the  higher  and 
lower  ranks,  and  they  had  never  been 
compelled  to  do  any  thing  against  their 
conscience.  This  is  clearly  shown  from 
what  Eusebius  relates,  as  well  as  from  a 
remarkable  circumstance  which,  as  we  can 
determine  with  certainty  from  the  name 
of  the  consul  given  in  a  narration  prepared 
by  eye-witnesses,  took  place  in  the  year 
295.1  It  is  one  of  the  instances  of  an 
absolute  refusal  of  a  part  of  the  Christians 
to  enter  into  military  service,  on  the  plea 
that  it  was,  by  its  very  nature,  incompati- 
ble with  their  religion  ;  instances  which, 
although  their  force  was  weakened  by 
many  others  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
question,  might  very  easily  serve  as  an 
argument  to  the  enemies  of  Christianity, 
to  support  their  assertion  that  Christianity 
was  detrimental  to  a  state.  At  Sevesla, 
in  Numidia,  a  young  man  of  the  name  of 
Maximilian  was  brought  before  the  pro- 
consul, as  bound  to  serve  in  the  army  ;  as 
he  entered,  and  was  about  to  be  measured, 
to  see  if  he  had  the  stature  required,  he 
declared  at  once,  "  I  cannot  be  a  soldier, 
1  can  do  nothing  wicked,  I  am  a  Chris- 
tian I"  The  proconsul,  without  noticing 
his  protestations,  coolly  ordered  him  to 
be  measured,  and  when  he  was  found  to 
be  of  the  standard  height,  the  proconsul 
said  to  him,  "  Let  them  put  the  insignia 


*  Ncque  reprehend!  a  nova  vetus  rcligio  deberet. 
Maximi  enini,  criminis  est  retractare  quae  semel  ab 
antiquis  tractataet  definita  sunt,  statuin  et  cursum 
tenent  ct  possident. 

f  Not  the  author  of  the  Commentary  on  the 
Golden  Verses. 


*  De  Mortib.  Persecut.  r.  x. ;  comp.  with  Lac- 
tant.  Institut.  iv.  c  27.  Consfantin.  in  Euseb. 
Vit.  Const,  ii.  50.  [In  our  own  times  the  Papists 
at  Naples  have  attributed  the  delay  in  the  lique- 
faction of  the  blood  of  St.  Januarius  to  the  presence 
of  heretics,  i.  e.  English  people. — H.  J.  R.] 

f  [This  account  is  found  in  Ruinart  .\cta  Sine, 
p.  299—302.  See  also  Gibbon,  ch.  xvi.  p.  680, 
4to  ed.— H.  J.  R.] 

H 


86 


REFUSAL   TO    SERVE    IN    THE    ARMV. 


of  ihe  military  service  round  your  neck, 
and  become  a  soldier;"  without  taking 
any  further  notice  of  his  profession  of 
Christianity.  The  young  man  said,  "  I 
will  bear  no  such  badge,  I  bear  already 
the  badge  of  Christ,  my  God."  The 
proconsul,  who  was  an  heathen,  sarcas- 
tically threatened  him,  ''■  I  will  send  you 
instantly  to  your  Christ."  The  young 
man  said,  "■  I  hope  you  may,  this  would 
be  a  glory  to  me."  The  proconsul,  with- 
out further  debate,  ordered  them  to  put 
the  soldier's  leaden  badge  upon  his  neck. 
The  young  man  struggled  against  this, 
and  answered  in  the  ardour  of  youthful 
laith  indeed,  but  with  some  deficiency  of 
Christian  humility  and  consideration,  "  I 
will  not  take  upon  me  the  badge  of  the 
world's  service  ;  and  if  it  be  put  upon  me, 
I  will  break  it,  for  it  is  unavailing.  I 
cannot  bear  this  leaden  token  about  my 
neck,  after  once  receiving  the  saving  badge 
of  our  Lord  Jesus,  of  whom  ye  know 
nothing,  who  died  for  us."  The  proconsul, 
though  a  cold  heathen  statesmen,  showed, 
nevertheless,  humanity  in  this  instance, 
by  endeavouring  to  persuade  the  young 
man  by  kind  arguments ;  he  himself  en- 
deavoured to  represent  to  him,  that  he 
might  become  a  soldier  without  violating 
his  duty  as  a  Christian,  that  there  were 
Christians,  who  performed  military  ser- 
vice without  scruples,  in  the  body-guards 
of  all  the  four  emperors,  Diocletian,  Maxi- 
mianus  Herculius,  Constantius  Chlorus, 
and  Galerius.  As,  however,  this  young 
man  of  one-and-twenty  years  of  age  would 
not  submit  his  own  conviction  to  the  ex- 
ample of  otiiers,  he  was  sentenced  to 
death ;  yet  in  his  sentence  of  death,*  no 
notice  was  taken  of  his  Christianity,  and 
his  non-compliance  with  die  duty  of  mili- 
tary service  was  alleged  as  the  only  ground. 
This  is  a  clear  proof,  that  the  soldiers 
also  might  openly  profess  their  Christi- 
anity, and  tliat  if  tliey  would  only  fulfil 
their  other  duties,  it  would  not  be  ex- 
pected of  them  to  participate  in  heathen 
ceremonies. 

But  a  few  years  after  this  occurrence 
tlie  case  was  diflerent.  Religious  and  po- 
litical reasons  determined  Galerius  to  ban- 
ish from  tlie  army  all  those  who  would 
not  offer  sacrifices.  An  order  in  the  army, 
that  every  soldier  should  offer  sacrifices, 
could  easily  be  procured  by  him.  Pos- 
sibly the  festival  of  the  fifteenth  year,  the 
nomination  of  Maximianus  Herculius  to 
tlie    imperial    dignity,   the    "dies  natilis 

*  Eoquod  indcvotoaiiiinosacramentummilitiffi 
recusavcrit,  gladio  animadverli  plaucuit. 


Caesaris,"*  in  the  year  298,  was  selected 
for  the  purpose  of  issuing  such  a  command 
to  the  army ;  for  this  time  would  be  ex- 
actly adapted  to  the  purpose,  as  sacrifices 
and  feasts  would  be  held  for  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  festival,  in  which  all  the  sol- 
diers might  be  compelled  to  participate. 
According  to  Eusebius,  (viii.  4.)  many 
gave  up  their  military  rank,  both  high  and 
low  left  the  service,  tliat  they  might  re- 
main true  to  their  faith.  Only  a  few  were 
sentenced  to  death ;  probably  only  in  those 
cases,  where  other  peculiar  circumstances 
were  added,  so  that  they  might  find  occa- 
sion, at  least  in  appearance,  not  merely 
to  cashier  them  as  Christians,  but  also  to 
punish  them  under  a  charge  of  high  trea- 
son. Among  people,  who,  in  their  hon- 
est indignation  at  the  suspicion  to  which 
they  were  exposed,  were  unguarded  in 
their  language  and  other  behabiour,  it 
was  not  difficult  to  find  such  occasions, 
and  to  represent  them,  under  the  military 
code,  as  mutineers,  deserving  of  punish- 
ment. An  instance  of  this  is  afforded  to 
us  in  the  case  of  the  centurion,  Marcel- 
lus,  at  Tingi,  in  Africa  (now  Tangier.) 

When  the  festival  in  honour  of  the  em- 
peror, after  the  Pagan  custom,  was  ac- 
companied by  sacrifices  and  banquets,  the 
centurion,  Marcellus,  stood  up  from  the 
soldiers'  table,  and,  throwing  down  liis 
centurion's  wand,  his  belt,  and  his  arms, 
he  declared,  "  From  this  moment  I  cease 
to  serve  your  emperors  as  a  soldier.  I 
despise  praying  to  your  gods  of  wood  and 
stone,  deaf  and  dumb  idols.  If  the  con- 
dition of  a  soldier  requires  this^  that  one 
must  offer  sacrifice  to  the  gods  and  to  the 
emperors^  I  throw  away  my  wand  and  my 
belt,  I  renounce  the  colours,  and  I  am  a 
soldier  no  more."  All  was  now  put  to- 
gether,— that  Marcellus  had  publicly  cast 
j  away  the  military  insignia,  and  that  he 
had  spoken,  before  the  whole  people, 
much  that  was  injurious  to  the  gods  and 
tlie  emperor, — and  he  was  sentenced  to 
death. 

This  was  the  first  token  of  the  perse- 
cution. Throughout  many  years,  Dio- 
cletian could  not  be  prevailed  on  to  do 
more  than  this.  But  when  Galerius  met 
his   old  sick  father-in-law,  who  had  al- 

*  [The  "  dies  natalis  Ctesaris"  was  the  acces- 
sion-day. The  accession  of  Diocletian  took  place 
A.  D.  284,  but  it  is  a  very  disputed  point  wliether 
Maximianus  Herculius  was  associated  with  him 
during  that  year,  or  in  the  year  286.  Tillemont. 
Hist,  des  emp.  vol.  iv.  p.  7,  and  595,  (2d  ed.)  de- 
cides  for  the  later  date,  and  is  followed  by  Gibbon, 
ch.  xiii.— H.  J.  R.J 


FIRST    EDICT    OF   PERSECUTION — A.  D.  303. 


87 


ready  designed  shortly  to  lay  aside  the 
government,  at  Nicomedia  in  Bythynia, 
in  the  winter  of  tlie  year  303,  he  made 
use  ot"  all  liis  powers  of  persuasion,  back- 
ed by  many  zealous  heathens  in  state 
offices  of  importance,  to  obtain  a  general 
persecution  against  the  Christians.  At 
length  Diocletian  gave  way,  and  a  great 
heallien  festival,  the  Permiralia,  on  the 
2d  February,  was  selected  as  the  time 
for  the  commencement  of  operations. 
With  the  first  dawn  of  day,  the  beautiful 
church  of  this  city  was  broken  into,  the 
copies  of  the  Bible  found  in  it  were  burnt, 
the  whole  church  was  given  up  to  be 
plundered,  and  utterly  destroyed.  On 
the  following  day,  an  edict  to  the  follow- 
ing effect  was  posted  up  : — "  The  assem- 
blies of  the  Christians  for  divine  service 
shall  be  forbidden,  the  Clirislian  Churches 
pulled  down,  and  all  copies  of  the  Bible 
burnt ;  tliose  who  have  offices  of  honour 
and  dignity  shall  lose  them,  unless  they 
abjure.  In  the  judicial  investigations,  the 
torture  may  be  applied  against  all  Chris- 
tians, of  any  rank  whatsoever,  and  the 
Christians  of  lower  ranks  shall  lose  their 
rights  as  citizens  and  freemen,  and  Chris- 
tian slaves,  as  long  as  they  continue  Chris- 
tians, shall  be  incapable  of  receiving  their 
freedom."  How  far  the  Christians  of 
lower  condition  were  to  lose  the  enjoy- 
ment of  their  freedom,  is  certainly  here 
not  siiOiciently  defined,  but  considerable 
latitude  is  left  in  the  application  of  this 
edict  to  individual  cases.  It  is  certain 
from  the  edict,  by  Avhich  the  emperor 
Constantine  afterwards  annulled  all  the 
consequences  of  this  persecution  in  the 
east,  that,  at  times,  freeborn  Christians 
were  converted  into  slaves,  and  sentenced 
to  those  kinds  of  slave-labour,  which 
were  at  once  the  lowest  and  the  most 
despised,  and  to  which  they  would  be  the 
least  adapted  from  their  former  habits  of 
life.*  (See  Euseb.  Vit.  Constant,  book  ii. 
ch.  32,  &c.) 


*  In  order  to  understand  the  meaning  of  the 
edict  as  far  as  possible,  we  must  compare  the  two 
im])erfert  and  inaccurate  statements  ^iven  by  Eu- 
sehius,  H.  E.  viii.  2,  and  the  writer  de  Mortib.  as 
well  as  the  translation  of  Rufinus.  IN'o  positive 
interdict  of  assemblies  for  the  worship  of  God  is 
expressly  given  in  any  of  these  places ;  but  the 
nature  of  the  case  shows  that  it  was  tacitly  implied 
in  the  edict :  but  it  is,  moreover  clear,  from  credi- 
ble and  official  documents  relating  to  this  first 
time  of  the  persecution  in  Proconsular  Africa,  that 
such  an  interdict  was  positively  expressed  in  the 
edict  The  words  of  Euscbius,  which  have  caused 
much  dispute,  are  dilficult  enough  :  r-.ut  iv  ciniTtut; 


A  Christian,  of  respectable  condition, 
allowed  himself  to  be  carried  on,  by  a 
somewhat  inconsiderate  zeal,  to  violate 
that  reverence  towards  the  government, 
which  the  Gospel  prescribes.  He  publicly 
tore  down  the  edict,  and  tearing  it  to 
pieces,  cried  out,  in  a  sarcastic  manner, 
''Behold,  these  are  new  victories  over  the 
Goths  and  Sarmatians,  which  are  posted 
up !  The  emperor  treats  the  Christians, 
his  own  subjects,  no  otherwise  than  if 
they  were  the  conquered  Goths  and 
Sarmatians!"  This  was  a  ground  which 
the  enemies  of  Christianity  were  glad  to 
avail  themselves  of,  that  they  might  con- 
demn him,  not  as  a  Christian,  but  as  one 
who  had  injured  the  majesty  of  the 
emperor. 

This  edict  must  have  made  a  more  ter- 
rible impression  from  its  having  been  pro- 
mulgated in  many  provinces  just  about 
the  time  of  the  festival  of  Easter,  and  in 
many  districts  on  the  very  festival  itself.* 
When  they  attempted,  by  burning  all  the 
copies  of  the  Bible,  to  annihilate  Chris- 
tianity, with    its    sources,   forever,  they 


<TTi^iTx.irScu.  By  the  words  h  ointrtxt;  we  cannot, 
according  to  the  common  use  of  language,  under- 
stand any  thing  but  persons  in  the  condition  of 
servants,  slaves.  We  must,  therefore,  if  we  wish 
to  put  any  reasonable  sense  on  the  passage,  seek 
for  some  other  meaning  for  the  word  rxcv9s^/i,  than 
that  which  first  ofTers  itself.  The  words,  "  shall 
be  deprived  of  their  freedom,"  may  mean,  "  shall 
be  put  into  chains  and  into  prison."  Compare 
above  the  edict  of  Valerianus  against  the  Ca3sari- 
ani.  But  it  is  safest  to  follow  Rufinus,  who  may 
have  seen  the  original  of  the  edict :  "  Si  quis  ser- 
vorum  permansisset  Christianus,  libertatem  con- 
sequi  non  posset."  If  this  be  correct,  the  trans- 
lation of  Eusebius  is  verj'  defective. 

*  Eusebius  and  Rufinus  set  the  publication  of 
it  in  the  month  of  March,  which  suits  perfectly 
with  the  time  of  its  publication  in  the  then  im- 
perial residence.  In  Egypt,  (which  also  just 
suits,)  it  was  published,  according  to  Coptic  ac- 
counts, on  the  first  Pharmuth,  i.  e.  according  to 
Ideler's  Tables,  the  twenty-seventh  of  March. 
See  Zoega  Catalog,  codd.  Copt.  Romae,  1810. 
Fol.  25;  or  the  fragments  of  the  Coptic  Acta 
Martyrum,  edited  by  Georgi.  Roma:,  1 793.  ProefaL 
109,  (where  Georgi  proposes  a  needless  emenda- 
tion,) and  in  other  places  also.  But  when  these 
Coptic  accounts,  which  are  full  of  fabulous  cir- 
cumstances, make  the  persecution  follow  imme- 
diately on  the  conijuest  of  the  Persians,  as  Diocle- 
tian's expression  of  thanks  to  the  gods  for  his 
victory ;  we  must  conclude  that  this  is  an  ana- 
chronism, unless  the  first  persecution  of  the  sol- 
diers is  confused  with  this  second.  The  cau.se 
assigned  by  these  Coptic  accounts  for  the  j)crse- 
cution,  namely,  that  a  Christian  metropolitan  had 
set  free  the  son  of  the  Persian  Sapor,  who  had 
been  entrusted  to  him  as  an  hostage,  can  hardly 
in  any  way  be  reconciled  to  what  we  know  of 
history. 


INTENDED    ANNIHILATION    OP   THE    SCRIPTURES. 


certainly  made  choice  of  a  means  which 
was  more  efficacious  than  the  extirpation 
of  the  living  witnesses  of  the  faith  among 
mankind ;  for  their  example  only  excited 
a  greater  number  of  followers.  On  the 
contrary,  if  they  could  succeed  in  anni- 
hilating all  the  copies  of  the  Bible,  they 
would  by  that  means  have  suppressed  the 
very  source  from  which  true  Christianity 
and  the  life  of  the  Church  had  constantly 
risen  up,  afresh  and  unconquerable.  Let 
them  execute  as  many  preachers  of  the 
Gospel,  bishops  and  clergy,  as  they 
would ;  nothing  was  done  as  long  as  this 
book,  which  could  always  form  new 
teachers,  remained  to  the  Christians. 
Considered  in  itself,  indeed,  the  transmis- 
sion of  Christianity  was  not  necessarily 
dependent  on  the  letter  of  Holy  Writ. 
Inscribed,  not  in  tables  of  stone,  but  in 
the  living  tablet  of  the  heart,  the  Divine 
doctrine,  once  established  in  the  con- 
sciences of  men,  by  its  own  Divine 
power  might  maintain  its  ground,  and 
make  further  progress;  but  as  human 
nature  is  at  present  constituted,  tlie  testi- 
mony of  history  declares,  that  Chris- 
tianity, separated  from  its  source,  the 
Avord  of  God,  from  which  it  may  always 
be  recalled  to  its  purity,  would  soon  be 
overwhelmed  by  the  mixture  of  falsehood 
and  corruption,  and  become  so  disguised, 
as  not  to  be  recognised.  This  means, 
therefore,  after  the  laws  of  human  calcu- 
lation, was  well  chosen ;  if  only  the  wil- 
fulness of  man  could  have  defied  the 
almighty  power  of  God,  who  wished  to 
preserve  the  treasure  of  the  Holy  Word 
as  the  best  possession  of  man,  and  could 
have  brought  its  deep-laid  schemes  to 
effect.  But  how  could  it  ever  be  imagined 
possible,  according  to  the  usual  rules  of 
human  calculation,  to  find  and  to  annihi- 
late, by  human  power,  all  the  copies  of 
the  Scriptures,  which  were  not  only  de- 
posited in  the  churclies,  but  were  also  in 
existence  in  so  many  private  houses .'' 
We  here  trace  that  blind  policy  which 
the  empire  of  lies  always  makes  use  of, 
while  ifexpects  that  nothing  can  escape 
its  search,  and  that  it  can  annihilate  by 
fire  and  sword,  what  is  protected  by  a 
higher  power!  The  blind  zeal  for  the 
support  of  the  old  religion  went  so  far  in 
many  cases,  that  the  heathen  would 
willingly  see  many  of  the  most  glorious 
monuments  of  their  own  literature  perish 
with  the  writings  of  llie  Christians,  those 
at  least  in  wliich  a  testimony  was  raised 
against  the  superstition  of  the  popular  re- 


ligion, which  were  constantly  used  by 
the  Christians  in  their  controversy  against 
heathenism;  and  they  would  gladly  have 
drawn  up  a  whole  index  "Librorum 
prohibitorum,"''  and  "expurgandorum."* 
One  is  immediately  led  to  suppose,  that 
where  people  of  this  description,  or  those 
who  would  gladly  earn  imperial  favour  by 
doing  too  much  rather  than  too  little, 
were  commonly  to  be  found  among  the 
governors  and  magistrates  of  provinces; 
many  acts  of  violence  and  cruelty  must 
have  been  committed  against  the  Chris- 
tians, by  the  fulfilment  of  that  first  edict, 
in  which  the  delivering  up  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  and  the  discontinuance  of 
congregations  were  commanded,  and 
especially  since  by  this  edict  Christians 
of  all  classes  were  subject  to  judicial  in- 
vestigations with  the  use  of  tortures. 

But  many  magistrates,  who  were  free 
from  this  fanaticism,  and  this  spirit  of 
base  flattery,  which  was  ready  to  sacrifice 
all  higher  objects,  and  who  had  more 
humane  feelings,  endeavoured,  as  far  as 
possible,  to  soften  the  rigour  of  these 
measures,  and  acted  with  as  mucli  luke- 
warmness  as  they  could  without  openly 
violating  the  imperial  edict.  They  either 
suffered  themselves  to  be  deceived  by  the 
Christians,  or  put  the  means  into  their 
hands  of  evading  the  edict,  and  fulfilling 
it  only  in  appearance.  Bishop  Mensu- 
rius,  of  Carthage,  used  the  precaution  to 
bring  all  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures  from 
the  churches  of  Carthage  to  his  own 
house,  to  preserve  them  there,  while  he 
left  in  the  churches  only  the  writings  of 
heretics.  When  the  inquisitors  came, 
they  took  these  writings  and  went  away 
satisfied.  They  were  assuredly  religious 
writings  of  the  Christians,  and  in  the  edict 
nothing  was  said  of  what  holy  writings, 
and  of  what  party  among  the  Christians 
it  meant  to  speak.  But  some  senators  of 
Carthage  discovered  the  imposition  to 
Annulinus,  the  proconsul,  and  required 
him  to  institute  a  search  in  the  house  of 
the  bishop,  where  he  would  find  all  the 

*  Arnobius,  who  wrote  exactly  about  this  time, 
says  in  book  iii.  ch.  iv. :  "  Not  a  few  abhorred  the 
work  of  Cicero  de  Natura  Deorum,  and  could  not 
prevail  on  themselves  to  read  a  book,  which  con- 
tradicted their  ancient  prejudices."  Others  said, 
in  the  greatest  indignation,  that  a  "  Scnatus-con- 
sultum"  ought  to  he  published,  that  those  writings 
might  be  annihilated,  by  which  Christianity  was 
confirmed,  and  the  authority  of  antiquity  was 
unch'rmined.  "  Aboleatitur  ut  hsec  scripta,  quibus 
Christiana  religio  comprobetur,  et  vetustatis  op- 
primatur  auctoritas. 


DIFFERENT  CONDUCT  OF  THE  CHRISTIANS. 


writings.  But  the  proconsul,*  who  was 
willing  to  be  deceived,  would  not  comply 
with  this  request.  When  Secundus,  an- 
other Numidian  bishop,  refused  to  deliver 
lip  the  holy  writings,  the  inquisitors  asked 
him  why  he  could  not  deliver  up  some 
useless  extracts,  or  at  least  give  them 
something,  any  thing  he  pleased.j  With 
the  same  intention,  probably,  must  the 
legate  of  the  proconsul  have  asked  the 
ISJumidian  bishop  Felix,  as  he  did  more 
than  once,  "Why,  then,  do  you  not  give 
up  your  superlluous  writings  ?"J  So  also 
in  the  case  of  Felix,  the  African  bishop, 
when  the  Prsfectus  praetori  asked  him, 
'•  Why  dost  thou  not  deliver  up  the  holy 
writings  ?  or  perhaps,  thou  hast  none  :" 
it  is  evident  enough  that  he  meant  to  put 
the  latter  assertion  into  his  mouth.§ 

In  the  conduct  of  the  Christians  at  this 
critical  time,  we  find  the  opposite  results 
which,  under  such  circumstances,  the 
different  inclinations  and  imperfections  of 
liuman  nature  are  apt  to  bring  about : 
some,  in  the  dread  of  martyrdom  and 
death,  gave  up  their  copies  of  the  Bible, 
which  were  then  burned  in  the  public 
market-place ;  these  men  were  excom- 
miuiicated  under  the  name  of  traditores  : 
others — of  whicli  we  find  examples  more 
particularly  in  North  Africa,  where  an 
enthusiastic  disposition  was  natural  to  the 
people — without  any  necessity,  but  in  a 
blind  zeal,  into  the  composition  of  which 
something  of  earthly  warmth  entered, 
gave  themselves  up  to  death  by  declaring 
that  they  were  Christians,  that  they  had 
holy  writings  in  their  possession,  but  that 
nothing  should  induce  them  to  give  them 
up ;  or  else  they  rejected  with  scorn  the 
means  of  evasion  proffered  by  governors 
of  humane  feelings  :  in  this  latter  case, 
we  ought  to  give  high  honour  to  a  tender 
conscientiousness,  which  did  not  act  thus 
out  ofa  delusive  enthusiasm  to  become  mar- 
tyrs, but  because  they  held  it  unchristian 
to  deceive  in  this  manner,  or  because  it 
appeared  to  them  a  tacit  denial  of  the 
faith,  if  they  delivered  up  these  writings 
to  the  heathen,  and  allowed  them  to  think 
that  these  were  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the 


*  Augustin.  brevicul.  collat.  c.  Donatist.  d.  iii. 
c.  13.  Optat,  Milev.  ed.  du.  Pin.  p.  174,  [vol.  i. 
p.  18.3,  ed.  Ohcrlhur.— H.  J.  R.] 

j  Aliqua  iK/icku.  aut  quodcunqiie. 

i  "Quarc  Scripturas  non  tradis  supervacuasi" 
is,  pcrliaps,  intentionally  ambiguous,  so  that  the 
words  might  he  understood  to  mean  that  the 
Christian  writings  in  general  were  something 
useless. 

§  See  the  Acta  Felicis  in  Ruinart. 
12 


89 


Christians.  Others  believed  it  to  be  their 
duty  to  remain  true  to  their  faith  \vith  the 
simplicity  of  doves,  and  witlt  Christian 
prudence  to  accommodate  themselves  to 
the  times.  They  used  every  precaution 
which  was  not  incompatible  with  the 
profession  of  Christianity,  to  save  from 
danger  their  own  lives,  and  at  the  same 
time,  the  copies  of  the  Scriptures  ;  and  in 
order  to  divert  the  jealousy  of  the  hea- 
then, they  endeavoured  to  temper  the 
violent  zeal  of  their  brethren.  It  was 
likely  enough  that  these  men  should  be 
condemned  by  the  other  party,  as  men 
with  whom  the  fear  of  man  and  human 
considerations  had  too  much  weight,  and 
as  cowardly  traitors  to  the  faith — a  feel- 
ing which  proved  in  after  days  the  source 
of  many  convulsing  struggles  in  the  North 
African  Church.  The  prudence,  however, 
of  this  party  in  the  Church,  at  least  had 
this  advantage,  that  it  withdrew  from  the 
fanatical  fury  of  the  people  many  copies 
of  the  Bible,  which  otherwise  would  have 
been  a  prey  to  the  flames. 

We  shall  now,  as  Ave  have  before  done, 
consider  some  individual  traits  of  Chris- 
tian faith  and  courage,  as  they  are  told  in 
credible  accounts.  In  a  country  town  of 
Numidia,  a  body  of  Christians,  among 
whom  was  a  boy  of  very  tender  age,  were 
seized  in  the  house  of  a  reader,  where  they 
were  assembled  for  Scriptural  instruction, 
and  for  the  celebration  of  the  communion. 
They  wsre  led  away  to  Carthage  to  the 
tribunal  of  the  proconsul,  singing  on  the 
road  songs  of  praise  to  God.  Torture 
was  employed  on  the  greater  part  of  these, 
in  order  to  wring  an  avowal  from  all.  In 
the  midst  of  his  torments  one  of  them 
cried  out,  "  Ye  sin,  unhappy  men,  ye  sin, 
ye  punish  the  innocent,  we  are  no  mur- 
derers, we  have  deceived  no  man  ;  God 
have  mercy  on  thee.  I  thank  thee,  God? 
and  give  me  strength  to  suffer  for  thy 
name  !  Free  tliy  servant  from  the  slavery 
of  this  world,  I  thank  thee,  and  yet  1  am 
unable  to  thank  tliee.*  To  the  glory  of 
God  !  I  thank  the  God  of  the  kingdom. 
Tiie  eternal,  the  incorruptible  kingdom  is 
at  hand  :  oh  !  Lord  Christ,  we  are  Chris- 
tians, we  are  thy  servants.  Thou  art  our 
hope  !"  On  his  praying  thus,  the  procon- 
sul said  to  him,  "  You  ought  to  have 
obeyed  the  imperial  edict;"  and  he  an- 
swered widi  a  spirit  full  of  power,  though 
his  body  was  weak  and  exhausted,  "  I 
now  revere  only  the  law  of  God  which  I 


*  ["Zur  Herrlichkeit." — Neander.      Ad  glo- 
riam.  Act.  Sat.] 

H    2 


HEROIC    CONDUCT    OF   THE    CHRISTIANS. 


90 

have  learnt.  For  this  law  will  I  die,  in 
this  law  do  I  become  perfect,  and  besides 
it  there  is  no  other."  Another,  in  the 
midst  of  the  torture,  prayed  thus  :  "  Help 
me,  O  Christ !  I  praj-  Thee,  have  pity  on 
me;  keep  my  soul,  preserve  my  spirit, 
that  I  may  not  be  brought  to  confusion. 
O  give  me  strength  to.  suffer."  To  the 
reader  in  whose  house  the  assemblages 
had  taken  place,  the  proconsul  said,"  You 
ought  not  to  have  received  them."  He 
replied,  "  I  could  not  decline  to  receive 
my  brethren."  The  proconsul :  "  But 
the  imperial  edict  ought  to  have  out- 
weighed these  considerations."  The 
reader:  "  God  is  more  than  the  emperor." 
Tlie  proconsul :  "  Have  you  then  Holy 
Scriptures  in  your  house  .?"  The  martyr : 
"Yes,  I  have  them,  but  it  is  in  my  heart." 
Tliere  was  among  the  prisoners  a  girl 
named  Victoria,  whose  father  and  brother 
were  still  heathens.  Her  brother,  Fortu- 
natianus,  took  care  to  be  present  to  move 
her  to  an  abjuration,  and  thus  obtain  her 
freedom.  When  she  steadfastly  avowed 
that  she  was  a  Christian,  her  brother  gave 
out  that  she  was  of  unsound  mind ;  but 
she  declared,  "  It  is  my  firm  and  steadfast 
conviction,  1  have  never  changed."  When 
the  proconsul  asked  her  whether  she 
would  go  with  her  brother,  she  said, "  No, 
for  I  am  a  Christian,  and  they  are  my 
l)rethren  who  obey  God''s  commands." 
The  proconsul  thought  that  he  should 
easily  frighten  the  boy  Hilarianus  by 
threats  alone,  but  even  in  this  boy  the 
power  of  God  showed  that  it  was  mighty. 
"  Do  what  you  will,"  he  said,  "  I  am  a 
Christian."* 

When  the  persecution  had  once  be- 
gun, it  was  impossil)le  to  stop  halfway. 
If  these  measures  failed,  they  must  go 
further.  The  first  step  towards  attacking 
the  Christians  was  the  most  difficult  to 
make,  the  second  followed  quickly  upon 
it.  There  were  also  now  many  addi- 
tional circumstances  of  a  peculiar  nature, 
which  cast  a  disadvantageous  light  on 
Christianity,  or  at  least,  might  be  made 
use  of  to  do  so.  A  fire  having  broken  out 
in  tlie  imperial  palace  at  Nicomedia,  it 
was  natural  enough  that  this  circumstance 


*  The  sources  from  which  those  accounts  are 
derived  are  the  "Acta  Saturnini  Dativi  ct  aliorum 
iu  Africa."  See  Baluz.  Miscell.  vol.  ii.,  and  Ruin- 
art,  and  du  Pin,  in  the  collection  above  quoted. 
These  writint^s  have  not  descended  to  us  in  their 
simple,  original  state,  hut  with  a  preface,  inter- 
spersed remarks,  and  a  conclusion,  which  were  the 
work  of  some  Donatist ;  but  it  is  clear  that  the 
groundwork  of  the  whole  is  the  "  Acta  Proconsu- 
laria." 


should  have  been  attributed  to  the  re- 
vengeful spirit  of  the  Christians,  and  the 
accusation  might  have  still  been  true, 
without  attaching  any  general  disgrace  to 
the  whole  Christian  Church.  Among  so 
numerous  a  body  as  the  Christians,  there 
might  very  likely  be  many  who  allowed 
themselves  to  be  carried  away  by  passion, 
which  they  would  palliate  under  the  sem- 
blance of  religion,  so  far  as  to  forget  what 
manner  of  spirit  they  ought  to  be  of  as 
disciples  of  Christ.  It  is  certain,  however, 
that  they  were  unable  to  prove  any  thing 
of  the  sort  against  the  Christians.  The 
impassioned  author  of  the  work  on  the 
judgments  which  befel  the  persecutors, 
says,  that  Galerius  himself  caused  the  fire, 
in  order  to  be  able  to  accuse  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  crime ;  but  his  authority  is 
insufficient  to  render  this  credible.  Con- 
stantine  attributed  the  fire  to  lightning, 
and  sees  in  it  a  judgment  of  God.  The 
truth  is,  as  Eusebius  justly  confesses,  that 
we  do  not  know  the  real  cause ;  it  was 
enough  that  the  Christians  were  accused 
of  a  conspiracy  against  the  emperor,  and 
that  many  of  them  were  arrested  without 
any  distinction  as  to  whom  suspicion 
could  attach  to  or  not.  Most  terrible  tor- 
tures were  used  in  order  to  obtain  a  con- 
fession, but  to  no  purpose.  Many  were 
burnt,  beheaded  or  drowned.  It  is  true 
that  fourteen  days  after,  a  second  fire 
broke  out,  which  was  very  soon  extin- 
guished, and  that  this  may  make  it  more 
probable  that  the  first  was  intentional.* 

Seditions,  which  soon  after  arose  in 
Armenia  and  Syria,  again  excited  political 
jealousy  towards  the  Christians;  to  this 
the  clergy  would,  of  course,  as  the  heads 
of  the  party,  be  more  especially  obnoxi- 
ous, and  hence,  under  this  pretence,  an 
imperial  edict  was  issued,  "  that  all  the 
clergy  should  be  seized  and  put  into 
chains ;"  the  consequence  of  which  was 
that  the  prisons  were  soon  filled  with 
clergy.  Many  circumstances  conspire  to 
show  how  ready  men  were  to  charge  the 
Christians  with  political  crimes;  and  on 
the  other  hand,  they  did  not  use  all  the 
precautions  they  might  have  done  to 
avoid  pretences  for  such  charges  as  men 
wished  to  lay  against  titem.  A  young 
Egyptian,  when  the  Roman  proconsul,  at 


•  Lactantius  de  Mortib.  relates  this  circum- 
stance, but  no  other  writer  mentions  it.  But  Lac- 
tantius, who  was  probably  resident  in  Nicodcmia, 
would  know  these  thinpts  more  circumstantially 
than  any  one  besides.  But  it  is  quite  possible, 
we  admit,  that  he  should  have  been  deceived  by 
some  report  then  prevalent  in  the  city. 


CHRISTIANS    ORDERED   TO    SACRIFICE. 


91 


Caesarea  in  Palestine,  where  he  was  ar- 
rested, inquired,  '•'  What  was  his  country  r" 
answered:  "Jerusalem,  which  is  where 
the  sun  rises,  the  land  of  the  pious." 
The  Roman,  who  probably  scarcely  knew 
of  the  existence  of  tlie  earthly  Jerusalem, 
unless  perchance  he  knew  it  by  its  Ro- 
man name  ^^lia  Capitolina,  and  who  knew 
still  less  about  the  heavenly  Jerusalem, 
imagined  nothing  else  than  that  the  Chris- 
tians had  founded  a  town  some  where  in 
the  cast,  from  whicli  they  meant  to  raise 
a  sedition.  The  thing  seemed  to  him  of 
great  importance,  and  accordingly  he  set 
on  foot  many  inquiries,  accompanied  by 
the  use  of  torture.*  A  priest  of  the  name 
of  Procopius,  of  Palestine,  on  being  re- 
quired to  oiler  sacrifices,  declared  tiiat  he 
acknowledged  only  one  God,  to  whom  we 
must  bring  such  sacrifices  as  he  com- 
mands. When  on  this  they  required  him 
to  oiler  his  libation  to  the  four  rulers  of 
the  state,  the  two  August!  and  the  two 
Caesars,  he  replied,  merely  to  show  that 
men  must  worship  only  one  God  as  Lord, 
by  the  Homeric  verse,  o^x  ayaQof  TroXu- 
xoi^avtn,  Sj-c.  It  appears,  however,  to  have 
been  taken  up  in  a  political  sense,  and  to 
have  been  construed  into  a  crime,  as  a 
calumny  on  the  reigning  tetrarchy.t 

Wlien  the  prisons  were  thus  tilled  with 
Christian  clergy,  a  new  edict  appeared, 
ordering  that  those  among  the  prisoners 
who  ollered  sacrifice  should  be  set  free, 
and  the  rest  compelled  by  all  means  to 
sacrifice.  And  at  last,  in  the  year  304, 
appeared  the  fourth  and  most  severe  edict, 
which  made  the  same  regulation  in  regard 
to  all  Christians.;]:  In  the  towns,  in  which 
the  edict  was  carried  into  effect  in  all  its 
rigour,  it  was  proclaimed  through  all  the 
streets,  that  all  the  men,  women,  and  chil- 
dren should  repair  to  the  temples.  Lists 
were  formed,  and  they  were  called  over 
by  name ;  all  were  carefully  examined  at 
the  town  gates,  and  those  who  were 
known  as  Christians  were  detained.  In 
Alexandria  even  the  heathens  themselves 
hid  the  persecuted  Christians  in  their 
houses,  and  many  would  rather  sacrifice 
their  property  and  their  freedom  than  be- 
tray those  who  had  taken  refuge  with 
thcm.§  The  punishment  of  death  was 
not  expressly  pronounced  against  the 
Christians,  but  an  edict  which  proclaimed 
that  the  Christians  should  be  compelled 
by  every  means  to  offer  sacrifice,  was 


I  surely  more  calculated  than  a  merely  un- 
I  conditional  death  warrant  against  all  con- 
fessors of  the  faith,  to  render  them  the 
victims  of  all  the  cruelty  which  the  fanati- 
cism of  a  governor,  or  liis  adulaiion  of 
the  emperor,  might  tempt  him  to  inflict. 
Every  one  was  perfectly  aware  that,  let 
him  go  as  far  as  he  would  against  the 
Christians,  he  incurred  no  responsibility 
by  it.  The  persecutors  already  believed, 
j  in  their  blindness,  that  they  were  able  to 
I  triumpli  over  Christianity  and  suppress  it; 
j  already  in  inscriptions  the  titles  of  honour 
:  of  the  emperors  were  augmented  by  the 
j  annihilation  of  Christianity  and  the  resto- 
I  ration  of  the  worship  of  the  gods  :  "am- 
j  plificato  per  orientem  et  occidentem  im- 
I  perio  Romano,  et  nomine  Christianorum 
deleto,  qui  rempublicam  everlebant.  Su- 
perstitione  Christiana  ubique  deleta  et 
cultu  Deorum  propagato."  At  the  very 
time,  however,  at  which  they  were  in- 
dulging in  these  feelings  of  triumph,  the 
circumstances  were  already  prepared  by 
Providence,  from  which  an  entire  change 
in  the  condition  of  the  Christians  was 
about  to  result. 

One  of  the  four  rulers,  Conslantius 
Chlorus,  to  whom,  under  the  title  of  Cajsar, 
the  dominion  of  Gaul,  Britain,  and  Spain 
was  assigned,  from  his  kind  and  humane 
character  was  not  disposed  to  persecution. 
Hence,  although  not  decidedly  a  Christian, 
he  was  yet  avowedly  a  friend  to  Chris- 
tianity and  to  Cluistians.  We  may  sup- 
pose that  he  really,  as  Eusebius  says,  ac- 
knowledged the  futility  of  heathenism, 
and  was  a  thorough  Monolheist,  without 
being  a  Christian,  or  that,  like  Alexander 
Severus,  he  was  an  eclectic  in  his  religion, 
which  is  more  probable.  To  those  around 
him,  who  proved  themselves  true  to  their 
faith  as  Christians,  he  showed  especial 
regard,  and  placed  great  confidence  in 
them ;  for  he  used  to  say,  "  that  he  who 
was  untrue  to  his  God  would  be  (ar  less 
likely  to  be  true  to  his  prince;"  although 
the  anecdote  which  Eusebius  relates  of 
his  method  of  trying  their  faith  does  not 
appear  probable. "  As  he  could  not  exactly 
show  himself,  in  his  character  of  Ciesar, 
disobedient  to  the  edict  issued  by  the  Au- 
gusti,  he  had  some  churclies  pulled  down 
for  the  sake  of  appearances.  In  Gaul, 
where  he  himself  usually  resided,  the 
Christians  enjoyed  perfect  repose  and 
freedom  in  the  midst  of  their  persecutions 
in  other  provinces.*     In  Spain  he  migiit 


*  Euseb.  de  Martyribus  PalrEstinm,  c.xi. 

f  Ibid.  c.  i.  t   Ibiii.  c.  iii. 

%  Athanasii  Hist.  Arianor.  ad  Monachos,  §  64. 


*  'J'his  is  stated  by  the  writer  De  Mortib.  Per- 
secutor, c.  1 6 ;  and  in  a  letter  of  the  Donatists  to  the 
emperor  Constantinus,  in  which  Ihcy  begged  for 


92 


CONSTANTIUS — MAXIMINUS. 


not  be  able  to  efi'ect  as  much,  but  certainly 
in  none  of  his  provinces  was  there  a  per- 
secution of  tlie  same  character  as  those  in 
other  districts.  This  prince,  so  favourable 
to  the  Christians,  was  nevertheless  able 
to  serve  them  more  effectually,  when  on 
the  resignation  of  Diocletian  and  Hercu- 
lius,  in  the  year  305,  he  was  raised  from 
the  dignity  of  Caesar  to  that  of  Augustus, 
in  conjunction  with  Galerius. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  entered 
into  the  number  of  the  Caesars  a  person 
whose  blind  heathenish  superstition  and 
cruelty  were  in  perfect  keeping  with  the 
character  of  Galerius,  who  chose  him  as 
Cajsar;  namely,  Caius  Galerius  Valerius 
Maximinus.  It  was  naturally  to  be  ex- 
pected that  in  the  provinces  assigned  to 
him  in  Syria,  and  the  adjoining  parts  of 
the  Roman  empire,  and  in  Egypt,  tlie  per- 
secutions should  be  renewed  with  fresh 
vigour.  At  times,  however,  men  became 
weary  of  their  own  violence,  and  as  their 
efforts  proved  unavailing,  the  execution 
of  the  imperial  edict  slackened  of  itself, 
the  persecution  slumbered,  and  the  Chris- 
tians began  to  enjoy  a  little  repose ;  but 
when  their  enemies  perceived  that  they 
had  taken  breath  again,  their  anger  arose 
afresh,  because  they  felt  that  they  had 
been  unable  to  extinguish  Christianity, 
and  again  set  up  heathenism,  and  then  a 
new  and  more  violent  storm  arose.  Thus, 
after  much  bloodshed  in  the  dominions 
of  Maximinus,  after  his  accession  to  the 
throne,  a  seasonof  tranquillity,  about  the 
eighth  year  of  the  persecution,  A.  D.  308, 
arose  for  the  Christians.  Those  condemn- 
ed to  labour  in  the  mines  began  to  expe- 
rience milder  treatment  and  more  consi- 
deration. But  again,  on  a  sudden,  the 
storm  of  persecution  broke  out,  and 
startled  the  Christians  from  their  tempo- 
rary repose.  A  new  and  more  strict  im- 
perial edict  was  issued  to  all  tlie  officers 
of  government,  from  the  highest  to  the 
lowest,  both  in  the  civil  and  the  military 
service,  requiring  ihat  the  fiiWen  temples 
of  idolatrous  worship  should  be  restored, 
and  that  all  free  men  and  women,  all  slaves, 
and  even  little  children,  should  be  com- 
pelled to  offer  sacrifice,  and  eat  the  meats 
offered  to  idols.  All  the  eatables  exposed 
in  the  markets  were  to  be  sprinkled  with 
water  or  with  wine,  which  had  been  used 
in  sacrifice,  in  order  to  force  the  Chris- 
tians into  contact  with  idolatry  in  their 
food.    So  far  did  despotism  and  fanaticism 


go!  New  bloodshed  and  new  tortures 
were  the  consequence. 

Then  again,  a  cessation  took  place  till 
the  beginning  of  the  year  3 19.  The  Chris- 
tians in  the  mines  were  enabled  to  assem- 
ble for  the  worship  of  God ;  but  when 
the  governor  of  the  province,  on  coming 
thither  once,  had  observed  this,  he  made 
a  report  of  it  to  the  emperor.  The  pri- 
soners were  on  this  separated  from  one 
another,  and  compelled  to  more  severe 
labour.  Nine-and-thirty  confessors,  who 
after  enduring  a  great  deal,  had  obtained 
a  respite  from  persecution,  were  at  once 
beheaded.  This  was  the  last  blood  which 
was  spilled  in  this  persecution,  while  in 
the  western  countries  the  Christians  had 
already  earlier  obtained  repose. 

The  exciter  of  the  persecution  himself, 
the  emperor  Galerius,  was  softened  by  a 
severe  and  painful  illness,  the  consequence 
of  his  debaucheries,  and  perhaps,  he  may 
have  thought  that,  after  all,  the  God  of 
the  Christians  might  be  a  powerful  being 
whose  anger  had  punished  him,  and 
whom  he  was  bound  to  appease.  It 
might  also  strike  him  that  all  his  sangui- 
nary measures  had  failed  in  injuring  the 
cause  of  Christianity.  In  the  year  311,  the 
remarkal)le  edict  appeared,  by  which  this 
last  sanguinary  struggle  of  the  Christian 
Church  was  ended  in  the  Roman  empire. 

It  was  declared  that  the  purpose  of  the 
emperors  had  been,  to  recall  the  Chris- 
tians to  the  religion  of  their  fathers  ;  for 
in  deserting  this  religion  they  had,  accord- 
ing to  their  own  fancies,  created  to  them- 
selves peculiar  laws,  and  founded  various 
sects.  This  is  the  reproach  which  was 
commonly  made  to  Christians  :  See  !  ever 
since  you  have  departed  from  the  unity 
of  the  old  traditional  religion  and  the  au- 
thority of  our  ancestors,  you  have  com- 
pletely followed  your  own  devices,  one 
innovation  rising  up  after  another,  and 
hence  comes  that  great  variety  of  sects 
among  you.*  As,  however,  most  of  the 
Christians  were  now  obstinately  fixed  in 
their  opinions,  and  it  was  clearly  per- 
ceived, that  they  could  not  honour  their 
own  God,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  pay 
due  homage  to  the  gods,  so  the  emperors 


Gallic  bishops  as  judges,  on  that  very  account. 
Optat.  Milevit.  de  8chisiuate  Donatistar.  I.  i.  c.  22. 


*  The  Latin  wordss  are:  "  Sicjuideni  quadam, 
ratione  tanta  eosdem  Christianos  voluntas  (such 
caprice,  ideycB^na-nnu.')  invasisget  et  tanta  stultitia 
occupasset,  ut  non  ilia  vctcruni  instltuta  seque- 
rentur,  qje  forsitan  primi  parcntcs  eorundem  con- 
stituerant;  sed  pro  aibitrio  suo  atquc  ut  liisdem 
crat  libitum,  ita  sabinet  leges  faccrent,  quas  obser- 
varerit  el  pcrdiversa  varies  populoscongregarent." 
Compare  the  objection  in  Clemens  Alcxandr. 
Stromal,  vii.  753.    [Sylb.  p.  320.  Potter  p.  866.] 


LUCIAN. 


wished  to  extend  to  them  accustomed! 
mercv,  so  that  they  might  again  be  Chris- 1 
tians,"  and  hold  their  assemblies,  but  only  I 
Oil  the  condition  that  they  abstain  from  ^ 
contravening  the  discipline  of  the  Roman  i 
state  (ita  ut  ne  quid  contra  disciplinam 
agant.*)  "  They  must  also,  after  this  cle- 1 
mencv  experienced  at  our  hands,  pray  /o 
iheir  God  for  our  prosperity,  the  prosperity 
of  the  state  and  their  own,  that  the  state 
may  remain  well  maintained  in  all  respects, 
and  they  may  live  quiet  in  their  homes." 


93 

Now  that  we  have  considered  the  at- 
tack of  mere  external  power  on  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  we  shall  give  a  glance  at 
those  who  opposed  Christianity  by  their 
writings,  men  who  often  at  the  very  time 
that  Christianity  was  sufl'ering  from  the 
arm  of  temporal  power,  attacked  it  on 
grounds  which,  though  they  wore  only 
[objections  in  appearance,  might  be  suffi- 
cient to  blind  the  natural  man,  and  with 
I  all  the  weapons  which  ridicule  and  so- 
Iphistical  acuteness  could  supply  them. 


SECTION  I.-PART  II. 

The  opposition  which  Christianity  met  loith  from  Heathen  Wntings. 

Thf.  hostile  sentiments  of  the  heathens  [  ence,  which  strives  to  form  the  heart  of 
towards  Christianity  were   different,  ac-   man,  not  mingle  itself,  before  it  has  fully 


cording  to  the  difference  of  their  philoso- 
phical "and  religious  views.    There  entered 
then  upon  the  contest  the  two  classes  of 
men,  from  two  opposite  points,  who  have 
never  since  ceased  to  combat  the   pure 
Gospel.     These  were   the  superstitious, 
to  whom  the  honouring  God  in  spirit  and 
in   truth  was  a  stumblingstone,  and  the 
light-minded  unbeliever,  who,  unacquaint- 
ed with  all  feelings   of  religious  wants, 
h'as 'accustomed  to'laugh  and  to  mock  at 
every  thing  which  proceeded  from  such 
feelings,  whether  rightly  directed  or  mis- 
taken^  and  at  all  which   supposed  such 
feelings    and   proposed    to    satisfy  them. 
Such  was  Lucian.     To  him  Christianity, 
like    every   other    remarkable    religious 
phenomenon,  appeared  only  as  a  fit  ob- 
ject for  his  sarcastic  wit.    Without  giving 
himself  the  trouble  to  examine  and  to  dis- 
criminate, he  threw  Christianity,  super- 
stition, and  fanaticism  into  the  same  class. 
It  is  enough,  in  any  system  which  lays 
deep  hold   on  man's  nature,  to  find  out 
some  side  open  to  ridicule,  if  a  man  brings 
forward  only  that  which  is  external  in  the 
system,  abstracted  from  all  its  inward  soul 
and  meaning,  and  without  either  under- 
standing or  attempting  to  understand  this 
soul  and  meaning.     Can  the  richest  wine 
escape  receiving  some  taste  from  the  im- 
pure vessels  into  which  it  is  poured .'  How 
then  shall  the  spiritual  and  godly  influ- 


*  The  emperor  had  apparently  expressed  him- 
self more  distinctly  on  this  point  in  a  rescript 
which  has  not  been  preserved. 


effected  its  work,  with  some  earthly  fail- 
ings, and  thence  exhibit  some  strange  ex- 
crescences. When  Christianity  first  at- 
tempted to  act  on  human  nature,  as  the 
new  principle  of  life,  to  attract  man's 
heart  with  a  magnetic  force,  and  set  all 
its  powers  in  motion  and  ferment,  we  must 
expect  to  find  that,  before  all  had  been 
brought  into  harmonious  union,  the  ex- 
isting tranquillity  could  not  be  destroyed 
without  creating  some  jarring  and  discord. 
He,  therefore,  who  looked  on  Chris- 
tianity with  cold  indifference,  and  the 
profane  every  day  feelings  of  wordly  pru- 
dence, miffht  easily  here  and  there  find 
objects  for  his  satire.  The  Christian 
miffht,  indeed,  have  profited  by  that  ridi- 
cufe,  and  have  learned  from  the  children 
of  darkness  to  join  the  wisdom  of  the 
serpent  with  the  meekness  of  the  dove. 
In  the  end  the  scoffer  brings  himself  to 
derision,  because  he  ventures  to  pass  sen- 
tence on  the  phenomena  of  a  world,  of 
which  he  has  not  the  slightest  conception, 
and  which  to  his  eyes,  buried  as  they 
are  in  the  films  of  the  earth,  is  entirely 
closed. 

.  Such  was  Lucian.  He  sought  to  bring 
forward  all  that  is  striking  and  remarkable 
in  the  external  conduct  and  circumstances 
of  Christians,  which  might  serve  for  the 
object  of  his  sarcastic  raillery,  without 
any  deeper  inquiry  as  to  what  the  religion 
of  the  Christians  really  was.  And  yet 
even  in  that  at  which  he  scoffed,  there 
was  much  which  might  have  taught  him 
to   remark   in  Christianity  no   common 


94  THK  PLATONISTS. 

power  over  the  hearts  of  men,  had  he 
been  capable  of  such  serious  impressions. 
The  firm  hope  of  eternal  life,  which  taught 
them  to  meet  death  Avith  tranquillity,  their 
brotherly  love  one  towards  another,  might 
have  indicated  to  him  some  higher  spirit 
which  animated  these  men ;  but  instead 
of  tliis  he  treats  it  all  as  delusion,  because 
many  gave  themselves  up  to  death  with 
something  like  fanatical  enthusiasm.  He 
scoffs  at  the  notion  of  a  crucified  man 
having  taught  them  to  regard  each  other 
as  brethren,  the  moment  they  should  have 
abjured  the  gods  of  Greece;  as  if  it  were 
not  just  the  most  remarkable  part  of  all 
this,  that  an  obscure  person  in  Jerusalem, 
who  was  deserted  by  every  one,  and  exe- 
cuted as  a  criminal,  should  be  able,  a  good 
century  after  his  death,  to  cause  such 
effects  as  Lucian,  in  his  own  time,  saw 
extending  in  all  directions,  and  in  spite 
of  every  kind  of  persecution.  How 
blinded  must  he  have  been  to  pass  thus 
lightly  over  such  a  phenomenon  !  But 
men  of  his  ready  wit  are  apt  to  exert  it 
with  too  great  readiness  on  all  subjects. 
They  are  able  to  illustrate  every  thing 
out  of  nothing ;  with  their  miserable  "  nil 
admirari,"  they  can  close  their  heart 
against  all  lofty  impressions.  With  all 
his  wit  and  keenness,  with  all  his  unde- 
niably fine  powers  of  observation  in  all 
that  has  no  concern  with  the  deeper  im- 
pulses of  man''s  spirit,  he  was  a  man  of 
very  little  mind.  But  hear  his  own  lan- 
guage :*  "  The  wretched  people  have 
persuaded  themselves  that  they  are  alto- 
gether immortal,!  and  will  live  forever ; 
therefore  they  despise  death,  and  many 
of  them  meet  it  of  their  own  accord. 
Their  first  lawgiver^  has  persuaded  them 
also  to  regard  one  another  as  brethren,  as 
soon  as  they  have  abjured  the  Grecian 
gods,  and  honouring  their  crucified  Master, 
have  begun  to  live  according  to  his  laws. 
They  despise  every  thing  heathen  equally, 
and  regard  all  but  their  own  notions  as 
profaneness,  while  they  have  yet  embraced 


*  De  morte  Peregrini. 

■j-  He  is  passing  a  sarcasm  on  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection,  which,  when  St.  Paul  brought  it 
forward  at  Athens,  had  met  with  the  same  recep- 
tion. 

i  We  must  here  understand  Christ,  if  we  judge 
from  the  context,  and  not  St.  Paul,  for  we  never 
find  Lucian  distinguishing  two  diflerent  founders 
of  Christianity  from  each  other,  and  indeed,  it  was 
impossible  that  witli  so  superficial  a  view  as  his, 
he  should  make  any  such  distinction.  And  here, 
too,  he  appears  to  he  thinking  pf  the  exhortations 
of  Christ  to  his  discijjles  to  love  each  other,  of 
which  he  was  likely  to  have  heard. 


those  notions  without  suflicient  examina- 
tion." He  has  no  further  accusation  to 
make  against  them  here,  except  the  ease 
with  M'hich  they  allowed  their  benevo- 
lence towards  their  fellow-Christians  to 
be  abused  by  impostors,  in  which  there 
may  be  much  truth,  (see  below  in  the 
Third  Section,)  but  there  is,  nevertheless, 
some  exaggeration. 

As  for  the  self-righteous  Stoics,  the 
advocates  of  cold  tranquillity,  of  an  apathy 
founded  on  philosophical  persuasion,  they 
saw,  as  we  have  already  observed  in  the 
case  of  the  emperor  Marcus  Aurelius,  in 
the  religion  of  the  people,  nothing  but 
blind  fanaticism,  because  the  influence 
which  it  exerted  over  man's  spirit  did  not 
repose  on  philosophical  grounds  of  de- 
monstration and  argument.  Arrian,  in  his 
Diatribe,  (B.  iv.  c.  7,)  inquires  "  whether 
a  man  could  not,  by  the  inquiries  of  rea- 
son into  the  laws  and  order  of  the  world, 
obtahi  that  fearlessness  which  the  Gali- 
leans attained  by  habit  and  by  mad  en- 
thusiasm." 

The  Platonists  were  the  nearest  of  all 
philosophers  to  Christianity,  and  they 
might  find  in  their  religious  notions  and 
their  psychology  many  points  of  union 
with  Christianity.  Hence  it  happened 
that  many  of  the  early  teachers  of  the 
Church  had  been  prepared  by  the  religious 
idealism  of  Platonism  for  Christianity,  as 
a  spiritual  religion,  and  used  their  philo- 
sophical education  afterwards  in  its  "ser- 
vice. But  it  was  only  natural  that  many, 
deeply  rooted  in  their  philosophical  and 
religious  system,  (which  they  considered 
perfect  and  finished  once  for  all,)  should 
struggle  the  more  eagerly  against  the  new 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  because  in  what 
they  once  possessed  they  had  the  com- 
plete advantage  over  the  rest  of  the  hea- 
thens. It  would  be  a  bitter  draught  to 
them  to  drink  the  waters  of  humility  and 
self-denial,  as  they  must  have  done,  had 
they  consented  to  form  their  habits  of 
thought  on  a  revelation  given  as  a  matter 
of  history.  But  there  were  besides  de- 
cided differences  in  their  habits  of  thought 
and  those  which  the  Gospel  requires. 
I'hey  must  renounce  their  superiority  in 
religion,  and  unite  themselves  with  the 
multitude,*  whom  they  despised,  in  one 
faith,  and  they  must  limit  their  love  of 
speculation  by  the  definite  facts  of  a  reve- 
lation! They  must  find  pure  truth  in 
one  only  religion,  and  give  up  their  fan- 
ciful heathenism,  open  as  it  was  to  specu- 


The  ■jToXKot,  the  o^xk. 


CELSUS WHETHER    HE    WAS    THE    EPICUREAN. 


95 


lation,  and  decked  with  all  the  graces  of 
poetry  and  rlietoric !  and  exchange  an 
imaginative  polytheism  lor  a  dry  and 
empty  monotheism!  Uninstructed  Jews 
must  become  more  to  them  than  their 
godlike  Plato !  Instead  of  the  God  of 
their  contemplative  conception,  their  o», 
from  forth  of  which  all  existence  eter- 
nally flows  by  a  necessity,  agreeably  to 
the  dictates  of  the  Reason,  from  the 
highest  world  of  spirits  down  to  the  very 
lowest  t/A)),  that  bounds  all  the  varied  de- 
velopments of  life,  and  stands  on  the 
extreme  limit  between  existence  and  non- 
existence— instead  of  this  god  of  their 
speculative  conception  [speculativer  Be- 
griffs-Gott]  they  were  to  recognise  a  per- 
sonal God,  who  created  all  tilings  from 
nothing,  by  the  act  of  his  own  freewill, 
and  who  guides  all  things  independently 
by  his  free  providence,  which  looks  not 
on  the  vast  whole  alone,  but  on  each  in- 
dividual portion  of  it.  The  multitude, 
who  are  unable  to  raise  themselves  to 
abstract  speculation,  might  have  a  god  so 
human,  but  for  a  philosopher  to  take  up 
with  a  god  of  the  people  !  This  conside- 
ration shows  us  plainly,  that  while  the 
Platonists  were  attracted  by  many  motives 
to  the  hive  of  Christianity,  on  the  other 
hand  there  were  many  feelings  which 
stirred  them  up  to  bitter  enmity  against  a 
religion  which  subjected  them  to  humili- 
ations-, so  opposite  to  all  their  habits  of 
thought. 

Tlie  first,  who  regularly  took  it  on 
himself  to  write  against  Christianity,  was 
Celsus,  and  most  probably  about  the  time 
that  Marcus  Aurelius  persecuted  Christi- 
anity with  fire  and  sword.  He  gave  hi% 
work  the  presumptuons  title  of  "  the 
Word  of  Truth,"  (A070?  'axaS*!?.)  It  is 
the  more  requisite  to  enter  at  some  length 
upon  the  character,  the  views,  and  the 
mode  of  argument  of  this  person,  be- 
cause, in  several  respects,  we  find  that 
he  was  the  forerunner  of  antagonists  of 
Christianity  in  general,  or  at  least,  of 
many  of  its  peculiar  doctrines,  and  that 
his  spirit  and  notions  have  often  made 
their  appearance  again ;  and  lastly,  be- 
cause it  is  often  shown  with  great  clear- 
ness by  his  case,  what  appearance  evan- 
gelical truth  assumes  in  the  eyes  of  the 
natur.il  man,  and  how,  in  his  judgment 
upon  it,  he  makes  his  own  blindness  and 
poverty  conspicuous. 

Muidi  doubt  exists,  in  the  first  place,  as 
to  the  person  who  goes  under  the  name 
of  Ceisus.  Origen,  who  wrote  against 
him,  goes  on  the  supposition  that  he  may 


have  been  Celsus  the  Epicurean,  who 
lived  in  the  reign  of  the  .Antonines,  and 
was  known  as  the  friend  of  Lucian.  But 
Origen  had  avowedly  no  other  grounds 
for  this  supposition  than  the  sameness  of 
the  name;  and  this,  even  supposing  every 
thing  to  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  tlie 
book  really  was  written  in  the  time  of 
that  Celsus,  would  be  but  a  very  weak 
argument,  unless  some  proof  of  a  con- 
formity of  views  between  this  book  and 
that  Celsus  could  be  established.  It  is 
of  great  importance  to  ascertain  this  point. 
Lucian  dedicated  the  Life  of  the  .Magi- 
cian Alexander  to  this  Celsus,  which  he 
wrote  at  his  request.  This  suits  well 
with  the  character  of  the  Celsus  who 
wrote  against  Christianity — for  he  too 
paid  great  attention  to  all  the  exhibitions 
of  enchanters  of  that  period,*  in  order  to 
be  able,  as  such  men  always  do,  to  class 
together  the  operations  of  a  higher  power, 
and  the  reveries  of  fanaticism,  without  any 
examination  of  their  internal  evidence. 
He  might,  therefore,  to  obtain  materials 
for  this  comparison,  and  to  use  it  in  his 
zeal  for  the  propagation  of  his  would-be 
illumination  of  the  world,  wish  to  know 
more  of  this  Alexander.  The  first  Cel- 
sus had  written  a  book  against  magic, 
which  Lucian  1.  c.  §  21,  praises  highly, 
and  which  was  also  known  to  Origen. 
The  other  Celsus  expresses  himself  in 
more  ways  than  one  on  the  subject  of 
magic.  In  Book  i.  p.  54,  he  says,  after 
citing  some  miracles  of  our  Saviour, 
"  Well,  then,  let  us  grant  that  thou  hast 
really  performed  these  things  !"  He  then 
proceeds  to  compare  these  miracles  with 
the  works  of  enchanters,  who  pledge 
themselves  to  the  performance  of  far 
more  extraordinary  feats,  with  the  super- 
natural power  of  wiiicli  the  Egyptians 
would  give  a  proof  in  the  market-places 
for  a  few  halfpence,  such  as  exorcising 
evil  spirits,  charming  away  diseases,  call- 
ing up  the  spirits  of  heroes,  raising  by 
enchantment  splendid  meals,  and  setting 
the  most  dead  substance  in  motion,  like  a 
living  thing.  "  Shall  we,  for  the  sake  of 
these  things,  consider  them  as  sons  of 
God,  or  shall  we  say  that  they  are  the 
tricks  of  wretched  and  contemptible 
men?"  In  this  passage,  there  is  no  trace 
of  a  belief  in  magic,  as  Origen  imagined 
— for  the  language  is  not  serious,  but,  as 


*  See  the  long  passage,  Lib.  348,  eJ.  Hoeschel, 
where  he  ventures  to  place  the  prophets  of  the  Old 
Testament  (as  well  as  Christ  himself,  m  other 
passages)  in  the  same  class. 


96 

it  often  happens  in  Celsus,  entirely  sar- 
castic. He  considers  it  all  as  mere  trick- 
ery, by  which  the  credulity  of  the  mul- 
titude is  easily  imposed  upon.  For  he 
had  before  doubted  generally  of  the  truth 
of  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  without  as- 
sicrning  any  grounds  for  his  disbelief. 
Where  he  sneeringly  compares  the  en- 
dowments of  animals  with  those  of  men, 
he  says,  among  other  tilings,  "  If  men 
value  themselves  on  their  skill  in  ma- 
gic, let  them  recollect  that  serpents  and 
eagles  have  far  more  skill  than  they,  and 
are  more  expert  at  miraculous  cures," 
&c.  Book  iii.  p.  226,  [p.  221.  ed.  Spen- 
cer.] Now  this,  as  Origen  remarks,  is  as 
if  Celsus  was  inclined  to  laugh  at  magic 
altogether.  Nevertheless,  when  he  brings 
forward  the  opinion  of  Dionysius,  an 
Egyptian  musician,  (apparently  with  ap- 
probation,) that  magic  has  no  power  over 
philosophers,  but  only  over  uneducated 
and  corrupted  persons,  he  appears  to 
speak  seriously.  "  It  is  the  opinion  of 
the  Platonisls  of  this  day,"  says  he 
"  that  the  magical  operations  of  the 
higher  powers  of  nature  and  demonical 
agency,  which,  according  to  their  doc- 
trine, belong  to  the  empire  of  blind  na- 
ture, the  region  of  y^»,  have  influence 
over  those  only  who  also  belong  to  this 
department,  and  not  over  those  who  have 
raised  themselves  up  to  the  Divine  Being, 
which  is  exalted  far  above  all  the  powers 
of  nature."*  Lucian  praises  Celsus  for 
mildness  and  moderation — qualities  of 
which  we  find  no  trace  in  his  writings, 
from  which  he  would  rather  appear  a 
violent  and  passionate  man.  One  feels, 
however,  that  Lucian's  judgment  of  his 
friend  may  be  a  just  one ;  for  persons  of 
a  character  whose  tranquillity  is  not  easily 
broken  and  disturbed,  are  often  the  most 
strongly  excited  when  any  thing  opposes 
them,  which  not  being  reducible  to  the 
measure  of  common  every  day  things, 
creates  an  excitement,  which  they  cannot 
comprehend,  in  the  hearts  of  men. 

It  is  not  the  opinion  of  Origen  alone, 
that  Celsus  was  an  Epicurean,  but  Lucian 
also  calls  him  a  zealous  admirer  of  Epi- 
curus. There  i.s,  however,  but  little  in 
the  work  against  Christianity,  which  wears 
even  the  appearance  of  an  Epicurean  babit 
of  thouglil;  and  even  this  little,  when  ac- 
curately weighed,  contains  in  it  much  that 
is  irreconcileable  with  Epicurism.  This 
was  remarked  by  Origen,  and  somewhat 
staggered   him   in   the   notion   that  this 


CELSUS  APPARENTLY  A  PLATONIST. 


•  To  the  dj^«T«/Tci'. 


Celsus  was  the  author  of  the  work.  He 
offers  three  hypotheses,  B.  iii.  p.  206.  [.?] 
between  which  people  must  decide  on 
the  subject :  first,  that  the  same  person 
chose  to  conceal  his  real  opinions,  ia 
order  to  oppose  Christianity  with  more 
efl'ect,  because  as  an  Epicurean,  the  par- 
tisans of  all  religions  would  be  against 
him  ;  secondly,  that  the  Epicurean  Celsus 
changed  his  opinions ;  or  lastly,  that  it 
was  a  diflerent  Celsus  who  wrote  the 
work.  The  first  supposition  is  hardly 
natural,  and  the  second  quite  gratuitous. 
It  is,  however,  difficult  to  collect  any  con- 
nected system  out  of  the  writings  of  Cel- 
sus ;  for  many  contradictory  opinions  are 
maintained  in  them,  and  he  himself  ap- 
pears in  general,  not  as  a  serious  and  deep 
thinker,  but  as  one  whom  the  spirit  of 
controversy  drove  to  express  much  which 
he  did  not  really  mean ;  he  often  ex- 
presses himself  sarcastically  on  things  of 
serious  import;  and  we  find  the  same 
contradiction  in  him,  which  was  common 
in  his  time,  namely,  that  he  sometimes 
played  the  enlightened  philosopher,  and 
at  other  times  he  maintained  the  old  re- 
ligion in  downright  earnest.  It  is,  how- 
ever, with  all  this,  still  undeniable,  that 
he  has  appropriated  to  himself  many  of 
the  ideas  of  the  then  prevailing  Platonic 
philosophy ;  and  yet  it  is  certain,  that  he 
must  not  be  confounded  with  the  deeper 
school  of  Platonism.  Among  the  notions 
he  borrowed  from  Platonism,  we  must 
reckon  that  of  the  soiiVs  relation  to  God, 
(p.  8.)  Some  representations,  however, 
of  a  higher  power,  which  slumbers  in  the 
souls  of  animals,  and  sometimes  beams 
through  them,  (p.  223,)  though  somewhat 
opposite  in  expression,  do  not  contradict 
this  ;  for  the  Platonists  themselves  say  of 
many  of  the  old  philosophers,  especially 
Pythagoras,  that  they  understood  the  lan- 
guage of  animals.  Again,  he  speaks  of 
the  Supreme  Existence,  (Sc)  which  no- 
thing but  the  contemplation  of  the  phi- 
losopher can  reach,  (371 — 374;)  of  the 
world,  as  the  Son  of  the  Supreme  God,  a 
©£o;  SiVTB^oi,  or  ©£o?  yst^roi,  and  in  this 
he  shows  his  ignorance  of  Christianity, 
for  he  charges  the  Christians  with  having 
borrowed  this  notion  from  the  Platonists, 
and  applied  it  to  Christ.  Undoubtedly, 
in  other  passages,  he  confuses  God  and 
the  world,  (p.  18,  240,)  and  he  does  not 
always  preserve  the  distinction  between 
Qeoi  TT^WTo?  and  ©eo?  Sevre^o;.  Again,  we 
find  the  "notions  of  the  stars  as  Divine 
beings,  ^(ju,  Geo»  OavE^ot,  (240,)  of  subor- 
dinate divinities  in  individual  portions  of 


CELSUS'S    OBJECTIONS    AND    SELF-CONTRADICTIONS. 


97 


the  earth  and  of  nature,  the  popular  gods, 
to  which  we  must  'be  subject  as  long  as 
we  belong  to  this  earth,  and  to  which 
we  must  show  becoming  reverence ;  and 
again  the  idea,  that  the  only  imperishable 
portion  of  7Ha7i's  nature,  his  spirit,  is 
derived  immediatehj  from  the  divinitij 
(205 ;)  the  idea  of  an  iXn,  irhich  resists 
the  divine  formative  princijjk,  and  is  the 
source  of  evil ;  the  notion  that  evil  is 
necessary  in  this  world,  (426 ;)  and  that 
of  evil  spirits,  who  springing  forth  from 
the  v^v-  oppose  the  Divine  Being,  (313.) 
The  popular  creed,  interlarded  with  some 
such  scraps  of  Platonic  notions  as  these, 
brought  forward  with  an  air  of  the  greatest 
pretension, — this  was  what  Celsus  oppo- 
sed to  that  spirit,  which  animated  and 
cheered  the  Christians  even  in  the  sight 
of  death ! 

The  charges  which  he  brings  against 
the  Christians  are  full  of  contradictions. 
On  the  one  hand  he  reproaches  them  with 
a  blind  belief,*  which  despises  all  exami- 
nation ;  that  they  have,  as  a  watchword, 
forever  in  their  mouths  the  phrase  ;| 
"  Believe  and  you  shall  become  blessed  :" 
and  that  to  all  difficulties  which  are  offered 
for  their  consideration,  they  reply  that 
"  With  God  all  is  possible  ;"  for  the  idea 
of  a  self-satisfying  taith,  differing  from  the 
mythology  of  the  people,  as  well  as  from 
a  religion  of  philosophical  dogmas,  and 
independent  of  speculation,  was  utterly 
strange  to  the  heathens,  and  he  was  un- 
able to  distinguish  between  faith  and  su- 
perstition. On  the  other  hand  he  objected 
to  the  number  of  their  sects  :  "  ]f  all  men 
should  become  Christians,"  he  says,  "  they 
would  soon  cease  to  be  so  again.  For  at 
first  when  there  were  few  of  them,  they 
all  agreed ;  but  now  that  they  have  be- 
come numerous,  they  separate  from  one 
another :  every  man  wishes  to  found  a 
new  sect,  and  they  agree  now  only  in 
name."J  And  yet  it  was  hardly  consist- 
ent with  the  character  of  a  religion,  which 
required  only  a  blind  belief,  to  introduce 
ao  many^various  habits  of  thinking,  and 
by  consequence  so  many  various  sects.  A 
blind  faith,  founded  only  on  authority, 
would  require  uniformity  of  views  and  of 
the  whole  spiritual   life.     Whence   then 


The 


^i<rvK  liAcXcf. 


f  Just  as  the  celebrated  physician  Galen,  who 
lived  about  this  time  and  a  little  later,  and  who, 
although  a  man  of  nobler  and  more  profound  mind 
than  Celsus,  had  no  perception  of  what  the  birth  of 
the  spirit  is,  made  their  xcy.v^  tvin-JmTcv;  a  sub- 
ject of  reproach  to  the  Christians. 

i  Lib.  iii.  120. 

13 


came  all  this  variety,  and  these  opposite 
developments  of  spiritual  feelings  ?  Had 
not  Celsus  been  so  superficial  an  observer, 
this  contradiction  must  have  struck  him, 
and  the  attempt  to  solve  the  difficulty  for 
himself,  would  have  led  him  to  the  con- 
sideration of  that  which  distinguishes 
Christianity  from  all  former  religious  ap- 
pearances. 

Celsus  knew  that  there  were  various 
sects  among  the  Christians,  but  he  did  not 
give  himself  the  trouble,  as  an  honest  in- 
quirer after  the  truth  wH)uld  have  done,  to 
separate  them  from  one  another.  He  had 
read  much  of  the  Scriptures,  but  in  such  a 
temper,  as  necessarily  rendered  him  in- 
capable of  understanding  their  divine  doc- 
trines, because  he  sought  in  them  only 
objects  of  ridicule  and  reprobation.  He 
had  classed  the  Christian  sects  together 
without  discrimination,  and  he  did  the 
same  with  their  writings ;  he  set  apocry- 
phal and  genuine  just  on  the  same  fooling. 
All  was  received  with  open  arms  by  him, 
which  could  represent  Christianity  in  a 
hateful  point  of  view,  and  was  gathered 
from  such  opposite  quarters,  as  the  fanci^ 
ful  dreams  of  the  Gnostics,  and  the  more 
sensuous  notions  of  the  Anthropo-mor- 
phizing  Chiliasts. 

He  sometimes  reproaches  them  with 
having  nothing  which  is  to  be  found  in 
all  other  religions  ; — no  temples,  no  ima- 
ges, no  altars  ;  then  again  he  calls  them  a 
miserable  race  of  sense-bound,  sense-lov- 
ing people,  who  could  recognise  nothing 
but  that  which  can  be  comprehended  by 
the  senses.*  Under  this  point  of  view  he 
declaims  against  them  on  the  necessity  of 
excluding  and  rejecting  all  sensuous  no- 
tions, in  order  to  contemplate  God  with 
the  eye  of  the  spirit.  Now  surely  the 
inquiry  might  have  struck  him.  How 
came  these  men,  who  are  so  completely 
dependent  on  sensuous  representations,  to 
arrive  at  so  spiritual  a  worship  of  God  ? 
h'  he  had  asked  himself  this  question,  in 
answering  it  he  must  have  traced  the 
power  of  that  leaven,  which  leavens  man's 
nature yrom  ivithin  ;  he  wotdd  have  seen 
in  that  covering  of  a  sensible  form,  in 
which  alone  Christianity  can  at  first  enter 
the  heart,  the  inward  and  higher  spirit, 
which  by  degrees  enlightens  and  ennobles 
this  outward  covering :  he  would  have 
found  that  these  despised  and  apparently 
sense-bound  Christians  had  some  higher 
views  and  feelings,  some  higher  principle 
of  life,  than  all  his  fine-sounding  phrases 


AoW.cy  Kit  <ft?^ca-aifjfjiTov  j»cc.  ^'ii.  366. 


9S 


CELSUS'S    OBJECTIONS    AND    SELF-CONTRADICTIONS. 


could  bestow  on  him.  How  low  and 
despicable,  how  groveling  and  earthly ! 
■with  all  his  discourse  about  the  Spirit^  do 
the  feelings  of  Celsus  appear,  when  we 
compare  them  with  the  high-hearted  feel- 
ings of  the  Christian  martyrs  of  his  time! 
Celsus  shows  most  aptly  what  the  na- 
ture of  the  Gospel  is,  and  that  it  can  be- 
come a  source  of  holiness  to  those  alone 
■who  will  look  within  and  recognise  their 
own  sinfulness,  and  a  source  of  true  riches 
to  those  only  who  will  become  poor  in 
spirit ;  he  shows  clearly,  also,  though  in 
his  own  blindness  he  saw  it  not,  what  it 
was  that  prevented  him  from  finding  these 
advantages  in  the  Gospel,  when  he  says, 
"  Those  who  invite  us  to  other  religions 
proclaim,  '  Let  him  draw  near,  who  is 
pure  from  all  stains,  who  is  conscious  of 
no  evil,  and  who  lives  in  holiness  and 
righteousness  :'  but  hear  what  the  invita- 
tion of  the  Christians  is  :  '  Whosoever  is 
a  sinner,  whosoever  is  weak  or  deficient, 
in  a  word,  every  one  that  is  a  wretch,  him 
will  the  kingdom  of  God  receive  !'  What 
then  I  was  not  Christ  sent  also  for  those 
who  are  pure  from  sin  ?"*  Most  assur- 
edly not  for  those  who  know  so  little  of 
their  own  sinfulness  and  of  God's  holi- 
ness, as  to  imagine  themselves  pure  and 
holy  !  But  Celsus,  though  in  candour  he 
cannot  be  compared  with  Nicodemus,  was 
one  of  those  to  whom  the  physician  of 
our  souls  might  say,  "  Art  thou  wise  in 
thy  own  opinion,  and  knowest  not  this  ?" 
Of  any  spiritual  power,  which  could 
triumpli  over  the  flesh  and  change  its 
nature,  he  had  no  conception ;  had  he 
only  possessed  an  eye  for  experience,  to 
whose  testimony  even  then  Justin  Martyr 
could  fairly  appeal !  but,  alas  !  even  with 
open  eyes,  man,  in  a  certain  condition  of 
mind  and  spirit,  may  still  be  blind !  The 
secret  by  which  a  sinner  might  become 
righteous  was  unknown  to  Celsus,  though 
he  still  gives  some  testimony  to  the  truth, 
when  he  confesses  that  no  law  and  no 
punishments  can  accomplish  this,  the 
greatest  of  mir-cles.  "  Now  it  is  mani- 
fest to  every  one,"  says  he,  "  that  those 
to  whom  sin  has  become  a  kind  of  second 
nature,  no  one  can  change  by  punishment; 
how  far  less  then  by  mercy !  for  wholly 
to  change  any  7nan''s  nature  is  the  most 
difficult  of  all  things?''-\  Granted  ;  but 
what  if  a  little  light  had  broken  in  upon 
the  darkness  of  his  mind,  and  shown  him 


*  Lib.  iii.  152, 
t  Lib.  iii.  156. 


3,    T/   it 


that  the  omnipotence  of  love  and  grace 
can  effect,  what  the  power  of  no  punish- 
ment can  accomplish ! 

AVe  need  not,  therefore,  be  surprised, 
if  with  such  sentiments  as  these,  Celsus 
was  unable  to  apprehend  the  real  and  dis- 
tinguishing characteristic  of  the  Christian 
life,  humility.  But  as  a  Platonist  he  must 
have  known,  what  indeed,  was  foreign  to 
the  notions  of  the  other  ancient  sages, 
who  gave  the  greatest  credit  to  a  feeling 
of  self-confidence,  and  of  power,  and  who 
only  used  the  word  humility  in  a  bad 
sense  ;  he  must  have  known,  that  accord- 
ing to  Plato,  (B.  iv.  de  Legg.)  the  word 
Toi'irttvoTn<;  is  capable  of  a  good  sense;  al- 
though he  was  far  from  arriving  at  its 
true  import.  He  brings  a  silly  accusation 
against  Christianity,  that  all  its  notions 
of  humility  arose  only  out  of  a  misunder- 
standing of  this  passage.  He  made  use 
of  certain  extravagances,  of  the  counter- 
feit quality,  which  always  is  found  beside 
the  genuine  one,  in  order  to  represent 
Christian  humility  as  something  weak  and 
childish,  as  if  the  man  of  humility  after 
the  Christian  pattern  was  one  "  who  was 
constantly  upon  his  knees,  rolled  upon 
the  ground,  put  on  vretched  clothing,  and 
covered  himself  with  ashes."* 

As  he  was  a  stranger  to  the  true  hu- 
mility of  human  nature,  so  was  he,  also, 
to  its  true  dignity  ;  the  feeling  of  the  true 
elevation  of  the  heart  in  God,  Avhich  is  as 
inseparable  from  true  humility,  as  true 
humility  is  from  it.  Christianity  alone 
can  reconcile  the  two  opposite  qualities, 
self-abasement  and  elevation,  lowliness 
and  dignity,  the  being  nothing  and  becom- 
ing every  thing.  This  was  to  Celsus  a 
secret  completely  closed ;  and  thence  it 
happens,  that  Avhile  on  the  one  hand 
he  charges  the  Christians  with  a  disgust- 
ing and  low  self-abasement,  on  the  other 
he  reproached  them  for  their  immode- 
rate pride,  for  daring  to  attribute  to  man 
such  importance  and  dignity  in  the  eyes 
of  God.  According  to  the  prevailing 
views  of  antiquity,  he  imagir^ed  God's 
care  bestowed  on  the  universe,  only  as  a 
whole ;  on  man  only  as  a  portion  of  that 
whole,  and  not  as  an  individual.  What 
the  Christians  declared  of  God's  special 
and  particular  Providence,  of  his  care  for 
the  salvation  of  every  individual,  appeared 
to  him,  therefore,  idle  presumption.  "^All 
that  is  in  the  world  was  not  created  for 
man,  any  more  than  for  lions  and  eagles, 
but  it  was  created  in  order  that  the  world, 


Lib.  V.  293. 


CELSUS HIS    CONTRADICTIONS — PORPHYRY. 


99 


as  a  work  of  God,  should  constitute  a 
perfect  whole.  God  cares  only  for  the 
whole,  and  this  his  Providence  never  de- 
serts. This  world  never  becomes  worse, 
and  God  is  not  turning  to  it  for  the  first 
time  after  a  long  interval.  He  angers 
himself  as  little  for  men,  as  for  apes  and 
Hies  .'"*  Such  was  the  idol  of  human 
reason,  with  which  the  Christians  were 
to  content  themselves  !  As  a  consistent 
Platonist,  Celsus  rejected  every  notion  of 
final  causes  [alles  Teleologische]  in  re- 
ference to  God,  and  redemption  could 
never  enter  into  their  system,  because 
evil  is  necessary  in  this  world,  it  has  no 
beginning  and  will  have  no  end,  it  re- 
mains the  same  as  it  always  is,  just  as  the 
nature  of  the  universe  constantly  remains 
the  same.|  All  travels  round  and  round 
again  in  one  perpetual  circle.  From  this 
point  Celsus  makes  that  shallow  objection 
against  the  doctrine  of  redemption,  which 
after  him  has  often  been  made  against  it 
by  Deists  and  men  of  Pelagian  sentiments, 
who,  however,  avoid  speaking  out  so 
plainly  as  Celsus,  or  are  less  consistent.;]; 
It  is  this,  "  that  God  has  made  his  work 
perfect  once  for  all,  and  does  not  need, 
like  a  man,  to  mend  it  afterwards."  This 
was  perfectly  consistent  in  Celsus,  who 
considered  the  world  as  a  whole,  an  in- 
dependent whole,  and  denied  moral  free- 
dom, but  his  fundamental  error  lay  ex- 
actly in  this  perverted  view  of  the  relation 
of  the  world,  and  especially  of  reason- 
able creatures,  to  God. 

A  nobler  and  deeper  spirit,  than  that  of 
Celsus,  animated  another  adversary  of 
Christianity  in  the  latter  part  of  the  third 
century.  Porphyry,  who  wrote,  perhaps, 
under  the  emperor  Diocletian,  or  some- 
what earlier,  was  by  birth  a  Phoenician, 
and  recast  an  Oriental  spirit  in  a  Grecian 
mould.  The  story  which  Socrates,  the 
ecclesiastical  historian,  relates  of  Por- 
phyry, that  he  was  originally  a  Christian, 
and  only  became  prejudiced  against  Chris- 
tianity from  the  ill-treatment  which  he 
received  at  the  hands  of  some  Christians, 
is  too  like  the  usual  tales,  by  which  men 
endeavour  to  explain  an  hatred  of  the 
truth  from  external  causes,  to  deserve  any 
credit ;  and,  certainly,  in  what  we  know 
of  Porphyry,  no  trace  of  a  former  belief 
in  Christianity  makes  its  appearance.  For 
many  of  the  notions  of  Porphyry,  which 
approach,  or  rather  seem  to  approach, 
Christianity,  certainly  cannot  be  quoted 


Lib.  iv.  236. 


Lib.iii.21I. 


tLib.iv.215. 


to  prove  this  point.  In  part  these  notions 
proceed  from  tliat  which  Platonism  has 
in  common  with  Christianity,  and  are  the 
more  earnestly  cited  through  his  eager- 
ness to  set  Paganism  in  a  refined  point  of 
view,  and  to  make  it  keep  its  ground 
against  Christianity,  and  in  part  they  serve 
to  illustrate  the  power  which  Christianity 
already  exerted  even  on  those  spirits  who 
rejected  it.  Had  Porphyry  not  been  the 
scholar  of  Plotinus,  he  might  have  endea- 
voured to  engraft  his  theosophic  notions 
on  Christianity,  and  would  have  become 
a  kind  of  Gnostic.  The  speculative  turn 
(so  opposed  to  the  Oriental  Gnosticism) 
which  he  received  from  Plotinus,  and  the 
engrafting  of  his  theosophy  on  the  Gre- 
cian Paganism,  made  him  a  bitter  enemy 
of  Christianity,  which,  recognising  only 
one  definite  scheme  as  truth,  has  nothing 
eclectic  in  its  nature. 

Porphyry,  in  his  letter  to  his  wife 
Marcella,  calls  it  the  highest  fruit  of  piety 
to  worship  the  divinity  after  the  manner 
of  one's  country.*  Thus  Christianity, 
not  being  the  religion  of  his  country,  nay, 
opposing  most  resolutely  that  religion, 
must  have  been  hated  by  him  from  the 
first.  Whilst  Porphyry,  however,  desired 
to  maintain  a  religion  which  was  at  va- 
riance with  many  of  the  fundamental 
doctrines  of  his  philosophy,  he  necessa- 
rily fell  into  many  contradictions.  He 
was  a  zealous  defender  of  image-worship, 
and  while  he  desired  to  maintain  tho- 
roughly the  old  popular  religion,  he  was 
in  fact  maintaining  the  old  superstition, 
because  his  spiritual  exposition  of  the 
former  was  wholly  unintelligible  to  the 
people,  and  yet  he  Avrites  thus  to  his  wife 
Marcella  :  "He  is  not  so  much  an  Atheist, 
who  honours  not  the  statues  of  the  gods, 
as  he  who  thinks  of  God  after  the  manner 
of  the  multitude." 

This  Porphyry  wrote  a  work  against 
Christianity,  in  which  he  endeavoured  to 
point  out  contradictions  in  Holy  Writ, 
and  contradictions  between  the  Apostles, 
and  especially  those  between  the  Apostles 
Peter  and  Paid.f  He  made  use  of  the 
weak  points  which  an  arbitrary  allegorical 
method  of  interpretation  among  a  par- 
ticular school  of  Christians  laid  open  to 
him,  to  bring  a  general  accusation  against 
them,  that  they  were  obliged  to  resort  to 
such  arts  in  order  to  give  a  reasonable 


*  Ep.  ad  Marcellam,  ed  Maj.,  where  it  is  re- 
commended rifxfV  TO  6i/;y  nnrn  to,  rrnr^iA. 

I  For  which  purpose  he  misapplied  the  well- 
known  occurrences  at  Antioch.     See  GaL  ii. 


100 


porphyry's  work  on  oracles. 


sense  to  the  Old  Testament,*  an  accusa- 
tion which  came  with  a  particularly  good 
grace,  forsooth,  from  Platonists,  who  had 
engrafted  so  many  meanings  on  the  old 
myths  and  symbols! 

Anoiher  work,  of  Porphyry  is  more 
accurately  known  to  us  than  this,  in 
which  he  also  speaks  of  Christianity,  and 
indirectly,  at  least,  endeavours  to  stem  its 
propagation.  This  work  professes  to  be 
a  systemt  *>!"  theology,  deduced  from  the 
pretended  oracles  of  antiquity.  He  wished 
by  means  of  this,  as  we  have  above  re- 
marked, to  satisfy  that  longing  after  a 
system  of  religion  founded  on  accredited 
Divine  authority,  which  led  men  to  em- 
brace Christianity.  There  are  even  now 
remaining  among  the  oracular  responses, 
some  which  relate  to  Christianity,  but  on 
this  head  they  speak  very  differently, 
according  to  the  different  notions  of  the 
priests  who  uttered  them.  As  it  was 
very  common  in  the  first  century  for 
women  to  embrace  Christianity  with  zeal, 
Avhile  their  husbands  w^ere  entirely  de- 
voted to  Paganism — a  man  once  inquired 
of  Apollo,J  what  god  he  must  appease  in 
order  to  lead  his  wife  to  renounce  Chris- 
tianity. The  pretended  Apollo,  who  knew 
the  firmness  of  the  Christians  in  their 
belief,  answered  the  inquirer,  that  he 
)night  as  well  attempt  to  write  on  running 
water  or  to  fly  through  the  air,  as  to 
change  the  sentiments  of  his  polluted  and 
godless  wife ;  let  her  continue  to  lament 
her  dead  God !  Apollo,  therefore,  appears 
to  justify  the  judges,  who  condemned 
Jesus  to  death,  for  a  rebellion  against 
Judaism;  for,  according  to  the  usual 
opinion  of  the  heathens§  (see  above,) 
"  the  Jews  knew  more  of  God  than  the 
Christians." 

Many  heathens,  from  what  they  had 
heard  of  Christ,  imagined  that  He  might 


*  Euseb.  vi.  19. 

f  TTi^i  TDc  \t,yia)i  <fi\oa-c<pt<t;,  a  work  of  which 
many  important  fragments  have  been  preserved  to 
us  in  the  Xllth  Sermo  curat.  afTect  of  Theodoret, 
in  AuRustin's  work  de  Civitate  Dei  (from  a  Latin 
translation,  in  which  Augustin  had  read  it,)  and 
last  and  chiefly  in  those  two  great  literary  trea- 
sures, the  Praiparat.  Evang.  and  Demonstrat. 
Evangel,  of  Euscbius. 

i-  Majus  has  most  improperly  concluded  from 
this  passage  that  Marcella,  the  wife  of  Porphyry, 
was  a  Christian.  Porphyry  is  here  quoting  the 
inquiry  of  another  person,  as  he  often  docs  in  this 
book.  ■  The  letter  to  Marcella  contains  nothing 
whatever  to  lead  us  to  suppose  that  Marcella  was 
a  Christian,  but  much  rather  goes  to  prove  the 
contrary. 

§  Augustin.  de  Civitate  Dei,  Lib.  xix.  c.  23, 


properly  be  ranked  among  the  other  gods, 
as  an  object  of  veneration,  and  asked  the 
opinion  of  the  oracle  on  this  matter.  It 
is  worth  remarking,  that  the  priest  who 
gave  out  the  oracle,  avoided  saying  any 
thing  disrespectful  of  Christ  himself.  They 
replied,*  "The  wise  man  knowsvthat  the 
soul  rises  immortal  from  out  of  the  body, 
but  the  soul  of  that  man  is  distinguished 
for  its  piety."  When  they  further  asked, 
why  Christ  had  suffered  death,  the  answer 
was,  "  To  be  subject  to  terrible  torments 
is  the  fate  of  the  body,  but  the  souls  of 
the  pious  go  and  take  their  station  in  the 
heavenly  mansions."]"  Porphyry  himself 
here  avows  that  we  must  not  calumniate 
Christ,  but  only  deplore  those  who 
honour  him  as  a  God.  "  That  pious  soul 
which  is  now  raised  to  heaven,  has  been 
by  a  kind  of  destiny  a  source  of  error  to 
those  souls,  which  the  gifts  of  the  gods, 
and  the  knowledge  of  the  eternal  Jupiter, 
have  never  reached." 

The  series  of  writers  who  opposed  the 
Gospel  is  closed  by  Hierocles,  the  governor 
of  Bithynia,  and  afterwards  of  Alexandria, 
who  chose  for  his  attack  on  Christianity 
the  season  when  persecution  against  the 
Christians  was  in  full  operation ;  a  time 
which  a  man  of  tender  feelings  and  noble 
sentiments  would  have  been  the  last  to 
choose.  It  was  also  peculiarly  unbecom- 
ing in  Hierocles  to  set  himself  up  as  a 
teacher  of  the  Christians,  for  he  was  him- 
self the  founder  of  the  persecution,  and 
bore  a  principal  share  in  it.  And  yet  he 
lays  pretence  to  an  impartial  love  of  truth, 
and  kindly  feelings  towards  the  Christians, 
for  he  entitles  his  work  "  A  truth-loving 


*  Euseb,  Dem.  Evang.  Lib.  iii.  p.  134. 
'Ott;  /uiY  dSaviTK  -^v^n  fxm.  <Taif/.±  7rg:/3:uvs(, 
"X iyyoi:TH.ii  iT',^iv\  TiTiHfAiic(:,  dxA*  yt  -^uX" 

'AH^O;  VJtJ-ifitiJ  TrgJj^i^iTTii^.t  imv  iKllVCU. 

j"  Ittjuit  /um  cj^'xvio-iy  0-j.Txvoii  am  7r^:0i0K>irr:u- 

It  may  be  that  Porphyry  has  sometimes  allowed 
himself  to  be  deceived  liy  oracles,  forged  by  Jews 
of  Alexandria  or  by  other  and  older  heathen  Pla- 
tonists. It  is  equally  possible  that  such  oracular 
responses  as  these  might  be  forged  under  the  name 
of  the  god  or  goddess  by  some  other  reasonable  and 
thinking  heathen ;  but  by  far  the  most  natural  sup- 
position is,  that  they  were  really  delivered  on  the 
above  occasion.  At  all  events  it  is  quite  inadmis- 
sible to  suppose  them  forged  by  a  Christian,  for 
the  Christians  would  never  have  had  the  tact  to 
say  so  little  of  Christ.  The  example  of  these  hea- 
then responses  may,  perhaps,  have  induced  the 
Christians  to  compose  others.  In  that  which  Lac- 
tantius  quotes  (Instit.  iv.  26,)  other  expressions, 
and  especially  this,  Svwtoc  env  k-zta  o-x^kx,  <ro<fo( 
T^ctTaxTeyfv  igyotg,  betray  a  Christian  author. 


HIEROCLES PHILOSTRATUS. 


Discourse,  addressed  to  the  Christians."* 
He  here  brought  forward  again  much 
which  had  been  said  by  Celsus  and  Por- 
phyry ;  and  allowed  himself  to  indulge  in 
the  most  shameless  falsehoods  about  the 
history  of  Christ.  In  order  to  deprive  the 
Christians  of  their  argument  from  the 
miracles  of  Christ,  he  carries  on  a  com- 
parison between  Him  and  Apollonius  of 
Tyana,  allowing  full  credit  to  all  the  fa- 
bles which  the  rhetorical  Philostratus 
chose  to  narrate  from  unauthenticated 
sources,  and  from  his  own  fancy ;  as  for 
example,  that  he  understood  the  language 
of  animals — while  he  takes  it  for  granted 
that  the  apostles,  uneducated  and  lying 
impostors,  as  Hierocles  chose  to  say  with- 
out proving  it,  told  only  untruths  :  "You 
regard,"  says  he,  "  Christ  as  a  God,  be- 
cause He  restored  a  few  blind  men  to 
sight,  and  did  a  few  things  of  a  similar 
kind,  while  Appollonius,  who  performed 
so  many  miracles  is  not  on  that  account 
held  by  the  Greeks  as  a  God,  but  only  as 
a  man  especially  beloved  by  the  gods." 
Such  was  the  peculiar  line  of  argumenta- 
tion adopted  by  Hierocles.| 

An  hostile  feeling  towards  Christianity 
has  also  been  supposed  to  pervade  the 
biography  of  that  same  Apollonius,  writ- 
ten by  the  rhetorician  Philostratus,  one 
of  the  favourites  of  Julia  Domna,  the  wife 
of  Septimius  Severus.  We  are,  however, 
imable  to  discover  definite  traces  of  such 
a  feeling  in  any  passages  of  the  work, 
although  occasions  were  not  wanting  on 
which  to  introduce  it,  as  for  example, 
where  he  speaks  of  the  Jews.  He  speaks, 
however,  far  more  of  the  anger  of  God  in 
the  calamities  which  befel  Jerusalem  (B. 
IV.  c.  29,)  which  the  Christians  reckoned 
favourable  to  their  cause.  It  may,  indeed, 
be  said,  that  Philostratus,  while  he  paint- 
ed in  exaggerated  colours  the  character 
of  a  hero  of  the  old  religion,  as  others 
did  that  of  Pythagoras,  was  endeavour- 
ing to  give  a  new  turn  to  a  sinking  reli- 
gion ;  and  such  an  attempt  might  certainly 
have  been  produced  by  the  general  exten- 
sion of  Christianity,  and  it  may  have 
been  his  intention  to  oppose  Apollonius, 
as  an  Hero  of  the  old  religion  to  Christ; 
and  he  may  have  been  led  to  many  indi- 
vidual features  in  his  story  by  what  he 
had  heard  of  the  miracles  of  Christ,  al- 
though no  prominent  allusions  of  such  a 


■\  About  this  person  consult  Lactantius  de  Mor- 
tib.  Persecutor,  v.  ii.  16;  and  Euseb.  adv.  Hiero- 
clem. 


101 

sort  occur,  as  would  really  prove  this 
point. 

While  Christianity  was  thus  assailed  by 
persecution  and  by  argument,  the  argu- 
ment found,  from  tJie  time  of  Hadrian, 
advocates  of  Christianity  and  of  the 
Christians  ready  to  cope  with  it.  We 
shall  speak  more  expressly  of  their  apo- 
logies in  our  chapter  on  the  teachers  of 
the  Church.  We  only  here  mention  that 
these  apologies  were  of  two  diflerent 
kinds,  and  had  two  different  objects;  one 
kind  consisted  of  expositions  of  Chris- 
tian truth,  destined  for  all  educated  hea- 
thens, the  others  were  more  like  official 
documents,  the  composers  of  which  came 
forward  before  the  emperor,  or  before  his 
representatives  in  the  provinces,  (the  pro- 
consuls, &.C.,)  as  the  advocates  of  Chris- 
tianity. As  they  could  obtain  no  hearing 
personally,  they  were  obliged  to  speak 
through  their  writings.  The  notion  that 
the  addresses  to  the  emperor,  the  senate, 
or  the  governor,  are  merely  ornamental 
dresses  for  these  writings,  according  to 
the  common  practice  of  rhetoricians  in 
these  days  to  compose  set-speeches  (de- 
clamationes)  does  not  suit  the  circum- 
stances nor  the  dispositions  of  Christians 
in  those  days;  it  is  more  natural  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Christians,  in  setting  forth 
these  writings,  intended  to  correct  the 
judgment  of  the  governors  of  districts  on 
the  subject  of  Christianity  and  Christians. 
It  is  not,  however,  to  be  wondered  at,  if 
these  writings,  in  regard  to  heathen  go- 
vernors, fell  short  of  their  aim  ;  for  they 
hardly  gave  themselves  the  time,  and 
were  hardly  in  the  proper  frame  of  mind, 
to  judge  with  calmness  of  what  was  said 
in  these  Apologies.  Even  master-pieces 
of  an  apologetic  nature,  which  these  Apo- 
logies, written  out  of  the  warmth  of  be- 
lief and  fulness  of  persuasion,  were  not, 
could  here  have  produced  no  effect,  for 
they  could  never  recommend  Christianity 
to  the  eyes  of  Roman  statesmen,  who 
looked  on  religion  only  in  a  political 
point  of  view  ;  they  could  never  ijiake  of 
Christianity  a  "  religio  Romana."  They 
might  appeal,  with  all  the  power  of  truth, 
to  general  rights  of  man,  unknown  to 
men  accustomed  to  look  on  religion  as  a 
matter  of  politics  ;  they  might  make  good 
the  principle  which,  near  as  it  scc7ns  to 
lie  to  the  human  heart  and  feelings,  was 
first  brought  into  full  light  by  Christianity, 
that  religion  is  a  matter  of  free  persua- 
sion and  feeling,  that  belief  cannot  be 
forced,  and  that  God  cannot  be  honoured 
by  a  service  extorted  by  force.  "  It  is," 
i2 


102 


FORMATION    OP   THE    CHRISTIAN    CHURCH. 


says  Tertullian,  (ad  Scapul.  ch.  u.)  "a 
matter  of  liuman  right,  and  is  a  power 
which  naturally  belongs  to  every  man,  to 
worship  the  God  on  whom  he  believes: 
it  is  no  business  of  religion  to  force  reli- 
gion, for  it  must  be  received  voluntarily, 
and  not  compulsorily  insisted  on."  All 
this  they  might  urge;  but  the  Roman 
statesman  concerned  himself  only  with 
outward  obedience  to  the  Imvs,  and  nothing 
could  teach  him  to  separate  the  man  from 
the  citizen.  The  apologist  might  appeal 
to  the  blameless  life  of  the  Christians, 
and,  demanding  the  strictest  investigation 


of  their  conduct,  challenge  punishment 
on  all  that  was  criminal:  this  too  would 
be  of  no  avail.  The  better  informed  no 
longer  believed  these  popular  and  fabulous 
stories;  like  Pliny, they  found  altogether 
in  the  Christians  no  crime  against  mo- 
rality. But  notwithstanding  this,  the 
Christian  life  appeared  to  them  irrecon- 
cileable  with  the  "  mores  Romani"  and 
the  "  disciplina  Romana,"  and  they  still 
regarded  Christianity  as  a  feverish  en- 
thusiasm, which  might  be  dangerous 
to  the  safety  and  order  of  the  Roman 
state. 


SECTION   II. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  CHURCH,  CHURCH  DISCIPLINE  AND 
CHURCH  DIVISIONS. 

I.  The  History  of  the  Constitution  of  the  Church. 
(1.)  The  History  of  the  Organization  of  Congregations  [or  Churches']  in  general. 


I.  In  the  history  of  the  formation  of 
the  Christian  Church  we  must  carefully 
distinguish  from  each  other  two  consi- 
derations of  great  importance : 

The  first.,  the  epoch  of  its  foundation  in 
the  apostolic  age,  as  it  arose  out  of  the 
peculiar  nature  of  Christianity  without 
any  extraneous  influence — 

The  next,  the  changes  2ohich  took  place 
in  it,  as  it  proceeded  onwards,  after  the 
first  simple  organization  of  a  Church, 
under  various  extraneous  influences,  to 
the  end  of  this  period. 

We  are  about  to  speak  first  of  the  foun- 
dation of  the  organization  of  a  Church  in 
the  apostolic  age. 

[A.]  The  first  foundation  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Christian  Church  in  the  Jlpos- 
tolic  age.* 

The  formation  of  the  Christian  Church, 
as  it  developed  itself  out  of  the  peculiari- 
ties of  Christianity,  must  essentially  differ 


•  [From  the  view  taken  in  this  chapter  andtlie 
first  [)art  of  that  which  follows,  of  the  early  gov- 
ernment of  the  Christian  Church,  I  feel  myself 
called  upon  to  cx])ress  my  most  decided  dissent, 
which,  I  trust,  I  may  do  without  presumption,  and 
without  giving  oflence.  The  point  at  issue  be- 
tween Dr.  Neander  and  those  writers  whose  sen- 
timents I  believe  to  be  founded  in  Scripture  truth, 
is  simply  this :  Whether  the  Apostles  actually  did 
institute  a  ministry,  and  make  provision  for  the 
continuance  of  that  ministry  ?  It  is  indifferent  to 
my  argument  whether  these  men  are  called  mini*- 


from  that  of  all  other  religious  unions. 
A  class  of  priests,  who  were  to  guide  all 
other  men  under  an  assumption  of  their 
incompetence  in  religious  matters,  whose 


ters,  priests,  or  presbyters ;  the  only  points  I  deem 
it  necessary  to  inquire  into  are  the  following : 

1.  Did  the  Apostles  ordain  ministers  by  the 
imposition  of  hands  ]  and, 

2.  Did  they  give  them  authority  to  ordain 
others  1 

3.  Was  it  the  office  of  these  ministers  to  teach 
the  people,  in  short,  to  be  their  spiritual  guides  .' 

For  the  two  first  points  1  shall  only  refer  to 
1  Tim.  iv.  14.  Tit.  i.  5 ;  and  the  marginal  refer- 
ences on  those  passages,  either  in  the  English 
Testament,  or  Wetstein's  Greek  Testament,  of 
1711.  (The  ed.  of  Gerard,  of  Maestricht,  printed 
by  Wetstein.) 

For  the  third  point  I  refer  to  the  descriptions 
given  of  the  office  of  an  episcopos  and  a  deacon, 
in  1  Tim.  iii.  iv. ;  and  Tit.  i.  ii. 

Now  the  next  inquiry  is,  whether  this  was  a 
mere  temporary  arrangement  for  the  lifetime  of 
the  Apostles,  or  an  institution  to  continue  as  long 
as  Christian  instruction  was  needed  1 

Our  reason  gives  but  one  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion, and  if  we  look  at  Christian  antiquity,  every 
thing  we  see  tends  to  confinn  that  view.  We 
believe  we  may  challenge  our  opponents  to  point 
out  any  season,  however  near  the  apostolic  age,  in 
in  which  there  was  not  a  body  of  ministers  duly 
ordained.  I  purposely  avoid  mentioning  the  epis- 
copal question,  not  from  any  doubts  upon  it,  but 
because  the  question  here  lies  between  ministers 
and  no  ministers.  Now  the  accounts  we  have  of 
clergy  and  of  bishops  come  up  tolerably  near  to 
the  apostolic  age.  Clemens,  Polycarp,  and  Igna- 
tius, may  be  supposed  able  to  judge  what  the  in- 
tentions of  the  Apostles  were  in  this  respect,  and 


ALL    CHRISTIANS    A    PRIESTLY    RACE. 


103 


business  it  was  exclusively  to  provide  for 
the  satisfaction  of  the  religious  wants  of 
the  rest  of  mankind,  and  to  form  a  link 
between  them  and  God,  and  godly  things; 
sucli  a  class  of  priests  could  find  no  place 
in  Christianity.*  While  the  Gospel  put 
away  that  which  separated  man  from  God, 
by  bringing  all  men  into  the  same  com- 
munion with  God  through  Christ;  it  also 
removed  that  partition-wall  which  sepa- 
rated one  man  from  his  fellows,  in  regard 
to  his  more  elevated  interests.  The  same 
Uigli  Priest,  and  Mediator  for  all,  through 


to  their  works  we  appeal.  They  were  the  con- 
temporaries and  the  disciples  of  the  Apostles  them- 
selves. As  I  have  already  touched  on  this  subject 
in  my  preface,  I  shall  only  refer  again  to  the  valu- 
able tract  of  Leslie,  intituled,  '  An  Essay  on  the 
Qualifications  requisite  to  administer  the  Sacra- 
ments,' where  there  is  a  full  collection  of  passages 
from  the  fathers  relating  to  this  point.  This  hasty 
sketch  of  the  outline  of  the  argument  which  the 
advocates  of  a  ministry  hold,  is  all  to  which  I  can 
give  insertion  on  the  general  question,  without 
overstepping  the  limits  to  which  I  must  confine 
myself.  During  the  rest  of  the  chapter,  I  shall 
merely  point  out  what  appear  to  me  weak  points 
in  the  view  which  Dr.  Neander  advocates,  and 
that  as  briefly  as  possible. — H.  J.  R.] 

*  [On  this  point  I  must  again  differ  from  the 
learned  and  amiable  author  of  this  work.  In  es- 
timating the  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  we  are  bound  to 
take  in  the  practice  of  the  Apostles  as  well  as  their 
writings.  Their  practice  could  not  contradict  the 
tenor  of  their  writings.  It  was  attempted  in  the 
last  note  to  hint  what  that  practice  was,  and  also 
some  of  the  language  which  they  themselves  held 
upon  the  point.  I  think  Dr.  Neander  seems  to 
argue  as  if  those  who  hold  our  sentiments  thought 
that  the  clergy  alone  are  to  pray  to  God,  and  that 
their  prayers  are  efficacious  for  the  rest  of  the 
people,  as  an  "  opus  operatum."  I  apprehend  that 
a  good  Roman  Catholic  would  not  entirely  ap- 
prove of  this  notion,  and  all  good  Protestants  de- 
clare their  abhorrence  of  it  by  ordering  the  prayers 
to  be  offered  "  in  a  tongue  understanded  of  the 
people."  What  we  claim  exclusively  as  minis- 
ters, is  a  right  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and 
to  teach  the  Church  of  Christ.  Now  it  is  ac- 
knowledged by  Dr.  Neander  himself,  (p.  199,  in 
the  German,  and  in  the  EngUsh  translation,  page 
107,)  that  the  ignorance  and  the  necessary  occu- 
pations of  many  of  the  Christian  brethren,  soon 
rendered  regular  ministers  necessary.  We  con- 
tend that  the  Almighty  foreseeing  this  necessity, 
(or  for  other  reasons  which  we  presume  not  to 
scrutinize,)  provided  for  it  by  establishing  a  body 
of  teachers. 

One  word  more  as  to  the  arguments  drawn  from 
the  expressions  in  1  Pet.  ii.  5 :  where  all  Chris- 
tians are  called  a  royal  priesthood.  This  argu- 
ment proves  nothing  against  a  body  of  priests, 
because  exactly  the  same  expression  is  applied  to 
the  Jews,  when  obedient,  and  it  will  not,  I  sup- 
pose, be  disputed  that  there  was  a  peculiar  priest- 
hood among  them.  See  Exod.  xix.  !),  6  ;  and  see 
Bennett's  Rightsof  the  Clergy,  p.  57;  Laurence's 
Lay  Baptism  Invalid,  vol.  i.  p.  195. — H.  J.  K.] 


whom  all  being  reconciled  and  united  with 
God,  become  themselves  a  priestly  and 
spiritual  race  !  One  heavenly  King,  Guide, 
and  Teacher,  through  whom  are  all  taught 
from  God  !  one  faith  !  one  hope  !  one  Spi- 
rit, Avhich  must  animate  all !  one  oracle 
in  the  hearts  of  all ! — the  voice  of  the 
Spirit  which  proceeds  from  God  !  and  all 
citizens  of  one  heavenly  kingdom,  with 
whose  heavenly  powers  they  have  already 
been  sent  forth,  as  strangers  in  the  world  I 
When  the  Apostles  introduced  the  notion 
of  a  priest,  which  is  found  in  the  Old 
Testament  into  Christianity,  it  was  al- 
ways only  with  the  intention  of  showing, 
that  no  such  visible  distinct  priesthood, 
as  existed  in  the  economy  of  the  Old 
Testament,  could  find  admittance  into  that 
of  the  New ;  that,  inasmuch  as  free  ac- 
cess to  God  and  to  heaven  was  once  for  all 
opened  to  the  faithful  through  the  one  High 
priest,  Christ,  they  had  become,  by  union 
with  Him  himself,  a  holy  and  spiritual 
people,  and  their  calling  was  only  this, 
namely,  to  consecrate  their  whole  life,  as 
a  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  for  the  mercy 
of  God's  redemption,  and  to  preach  the 
power  and  grace  of  Him,  who  had  called 
them  from  the  kingdom  of  darkness  into 
his  wonderful  light,  and  their  whole  life 
was  to  be  a  continued  priesthood,  a  spi- 
ritual serving  of  God,  proceeding  from 
the  affections  of  a  faith  working  by  love, 
and  also  a  continued  witness  of  their  Re- 
deemer. Corap.  1  Pet.  ii.  9.  Rom.  xii.  1., 
and  the  spirit  and  connection  of  ideas, 
throughout  the  whole  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews. And  thus  also  the  furtherance  of 
God's  kingdom,  both  in  general  and  in 
each  individual  community,  the  further- 
ance of  the  propagation  of  Christianity 
among  the  heathen,  and  the  improvement 
of  each  particular  Church,  was  not  to  be 
the  concern  of  a  particular  chosen  class 
of  Christians,  but  the  nearest  duty  of 
every  individual  Christian.  Every  one 
was  to  contribute  to  this  object  from  the 
station  assigned  to  him  by  the  invisible 
head  of  the  Church,  and  by  the  gifts  pe- 
culiar to  him,  which  were  given  him  by 
God,  and  grounded  in  his  nature — a  na- 
ture, which  retained,  indeed.  Us  indivi- 
dual character,  but  was  regenerated  and 
ennobled  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  There  was  here  no  division  into 
spiritual  and  worldly,  but  all,  as  Chris- 
tians, in  their  inward  life  and  dispositions, 
were  to  be  men  dead  to  the  ungodliness 
of  the  world,  and  thus  far  departed  out  of 
the  world  ;  men  animated  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  and  not  by  the  spirit  of  the  world. 


104 


THE    CHURCH    AT    CORINTH. 


The  peculiar  and  prevailing  capabilities 
of  Christians,  as  far  as  they  were  sanc- 
tified and  consecrated  by  this  Spirit,  and 
employed  by  it  as  the  organs  of  its  active 
inrtuence,  became  Charismata,  or  gifts  of 
grace.  Hence  the  apostle  St.  Paul  began 
his  address  to  the  Corinthian  Church,  on 
the  subject  of  gifts,  in  this  manner,  (1  Cor. 
xii,)  "Once,  when  ye  were  heathen,  ye 
suffered  yourselves  to  be  led  blindly  by 
your  priests  to  dumb  idols  ;  ye  were  dead 
and  dumb  as  they.  Now,  while  ye  serve 
the  living  God  through  Christ,  ye  have 
no  longer  any  such  leaders,  to  draw  you 
blindly  by  leading-strings*.  Ye  have 
yourselves  now  the  Spirit  of  God  for 
your  guide,  who  enlightens  you.  Ye  no 
more  follow  in  silence,  he  speaks  out  of 
you ;  there  are  many  gifts,  but  there  is 
one  Spirit."  Who  shall  arrogate  that  to 
himself,  which  tlie  enlightened  apostle 
ventured  not  to  do,  to  be  lord  over  the 
faith  of  Christians  ? 

The  condition  of  the  Corinthian  Church, 
as  it  is  depicted  in  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
deficient  as  it  was  in  many  respects,  shows 
us  how  a  Christian  Church  should  act; 
how  all  in  that  Church  should  mutually 
co-operate,  with  tlieir  mutual  gifts,  as 
members  of  the  same  body,  with  equal 
honour j\  supplying  one  another's  defi- 
ciencies. The  office  of  a  teacher  was 
not  here  exclusively  assigned  to  one  or 
more,  but  every  one  who  felt  a  call  to 
that  office  might  address  a  discourse  to 
the  assembly  of  the  Church  for  the  in- 
struction of  all.  According  to  the  differ- 
ences in  the  particular  natures  of  the  in- 
dividual Christians,  who  served  as  instru- 
ments to  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  by  which  the  difference  in  the  form 
of  its  manifestation  among  them  was  de- 


*  [I  must  request  my  readers  to  compare  this 
passage  with  the  original  Greek.  I  have  trans- 
lated from  the  (Jermaii  of  Dr.  Neander,  as  literally 
as  I  was  ahle,  but  he  has  paraphrased  the  passage, 
and,  I  cannot  but  think,  paraphrased  it  so  as  to 
pive  it  a  meaning  not  to  be  found  in  the  original. 
The  words,  "  by  your  priests,"  and  the  passage 
which  I  have  put  into  italics,  are  pure  insertions. 
Willi  regard  to  the  first,  the  heathen  priests  are 
probably  alluded  to;  but  the  clause  in  italics  on 
which  so  much  of  the  argument  depends,  is  en- 
tirely a  gratuitous  in.scrtion,  as  far  as  I  can  disco- 
ver. I  l(!:ivc  the  question,  therefore,  to  the  reader, 
requesting  him  again  to  compare  the  original 
passage. — H.  J.  K.] 

■f-  [It  appears  to  me  that  the  words,  "  with  equal 
honour,"  which  I  have  put  in  italics,  are  expressly 
contrary  to  tiie  sentiments  of  St.  Paul.  He  says, 
strongly  enough,  "Are  all  Apostles?  are  all  pro- 
phets! are  all  teachers  T"  «&.c.  I  Cor.  xii.  29. — 
H.  J.  K.1 


termined,  the  efficacy  of  this  Spirit  came 
forth,  sometimes  under  a  creative  form 
(as  in  the  gift  of  prophecy),  sometimes 
(as  in  the  gift  of  trying  of  spirits,  or  in- 
terpretation,) as  a  receptive  or  a  critical 
power.  We  hence  find  very  great  varieties 
and  differences  in  the  degrees  of  inspira- 
tion, and  in  the  relation  of  the  Human  to 
the  Diiiine  among  them  :  sometimes  the 
deep,  reflecting,  purely  human  energy  of 
the  spirit,  prevailing;  and  at  others,  while 
this  is  kept  in  the  back-ground,  the  Spirit 
of  God,  in  its  omnipotence,  outweighing 
it :  and  here,  too,  we  find  the  manifold 
degrees  of  the  gift  of  tongues,  down  to  the 
ordmary,   regular   gift   of  teaching    (the 

As  Christianity  did  not  annihilate  the 
peculiar  arrangements  of  our  nature, 
foinided  in  the  laws  of  our  original  crea- 
tion, but  sanctified  and  ennobled  them,* 
it  did  not,  (although,  in  reference  to  the 
higher  life,  the  partition-wall  between 
man  and  wife  was  taken  away  through 
Christ,  and  in  Him  man  and  wife  became 
one,)  it  did  not,  I  say,  allow  the  female 
sex  to  step  out  of  the  peculiar  habits  and 
destination  indicated  for  it' by  nature  her- 
self Women  alone  are  interdicted  by  St. 
Paul,  1  Cor.  xiv.  34,  from  speaking  in  the 
Church — a  proof  also,|  that  no  other  ex- 
ception from  this  general  right  of  all 
Christians  existed.  This  last  exception 
was  constantly  thus  retained  in  the  times 
that  followed ;  this  even  the  fanciful 
Montanists  recognised — they  only  deter- 
mined that  the  extraordinary  operations 
of  the  Spirit  did  not  follow  this  rule,  and 
they  appealed  to  the  case  of  the  women 
that  prophesied,  1  Cor.  xi.,  although  with- 
out good  reason,  for  the  apostle  is  here 
only  speaking  of  that  which  actually  was 
the  case  in  the  Corinthian  Church,  with- 
out approving  it,  with  the  intention,  at 
the  same  time,  of  settling  it  afterwards, 
as  appears  from  a  comparison  of  the  pas- 
sage that  follows,  which  we  have  cited 
above.J 


*  It  is  true  also,  in  this  respect,  that  Chris- 
tianity came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil. 

j-  [It  is  difficult  to  imagine  how  any  one  could 
consider  this  a  proof  of  the  assertion  in  the  text. 
It  ordy  proves  that  no  woman  was  allowed  to  teach, 
while  many  men  were;  but  it  does  not  show,  in 
the  smallest  degree,  that  all  men  might  teach. — 
H.  J.  R.] 

\  Hilary,  who  wrote  a  Commentary  on  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  is  particularly  distinguished 
by  his  impartial  manner  of  considering  Christian 
anticjuity.  Even  in  this  respect  he  was  well  able 
to   distinguish  the  original  Christianity  from  the 


OUTWARD  FORM  NECESSARY. 


105 


Now,  alihough  all  Christians  had  the 
same  priestly  calling,  and  the  same  priestly 
rights,*  and  although  there  could  not  be 
any  distinct  class  of  priests  in  the  first 
Christian  Church ;  yet  every  Church 
[genieinde,  congregation,  community  or 
Church,]  as  a  society  for  establishing  and 
extending  the  kingdom  of  God,  an  union 
for  the  avowal  of  the  same  faith  in  word 
and  work,  for  the  mutual  conlirmation 
and  animation  of  this  faith,  for  commu- 
nion, and  for  the  mutual  furtherance  of 
that  higher  life  which  flowed  from  this 
faith — an  union  for  these  most  lofty  aims, 
must  obtain  a  form  and  consistence  pro- 
portioned to  them  ;  for,  without  this  form, 
nothing  can  continue  to  exist  among  men. 
Christian  Cluirches  stood  still  more  in 
need  of  such  an  established  order,  since 
they  must  develope  themselves,  and  make 
their  progress  in  a  world  so  foreign  to 
them,  and  under  the  influence  of  such 
various  sources  of  threats  and  disturbance, 
or  at  least  of  affliction.  In  them,  as  in 
every  society,  a  certain  government  and 
conduct  of  the  common  interests  must 
exist.  That  form  of  government  must 
have  corresponded  best  to  the  spirit  of 
Christianity  and  the  purposes  for  which 
Churches  were  formed,  which  was  calcu- 
lated the  most  to  further  their  free  deve- 
lopment from  within  outwards,  and  also 
the  most  to  further  the  collected  and  mu- 
tual efficacy  of  all  individual  powers  and 
gifts.  The  monarchial  form  of  govern- 
ment would  have  too  much  tendency  to 
repress  and  overwhelm  the  free  develop- 
ment of  different  peculiarities,  and  to  in- 
troduce a  system  by  which  one  definite 
human  form  should  be  stamped  on  every 
thing,  instead  of  allowing  the  Spirit  free 
choice  to  develope  itself  under  a  variety 
of  human  forms,  and  these  mutually  to 
lay  hold  of  each  other.  It  would  too, 
probably,  lead  to  a  result,  by  which  that 
whicli  is  human  would  be  prized  too 
highly,  and  one  man  have  too  much 
weight,  so  that  he  should  become  the 
centre  around  which  every  thing  would 
gather  itself,  instead  of  the  one  invisible 
shepherd  of  all  becoming  the  centre  of 
all.  How  anxiously  do  the  Apostles 
strive  to  keep  olT  such  a  danger!  How 
much  does  the  Apostle  St.  Paul,  in  his 
first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  insist  on 


later,  when  he  says,  "  Prirnum  omnes  docebant  et 
omnes  baptizihant,  ut  cresceret  plebs  et  multipli- 
caretur,  omnibus  inter  initia  concessum  est,  ct 
evanijcllizare  et  baptizare  et  Scripturas  explorare." 
Hilar,  in  Epist.  Ephes.  c.  iv.  v.  12. 

•  [See  above,  note  *,  p.  103.— H.  J.  R.] 
14 


the  free  co-operation  of  all,  that  no  one 
power  or  disposition  might  overwhelm 
the  rest  and  reign  triumphant!  The 
Apostles  themselves,  conscious  as  they 
were  of  that  higher  degree  of  illumina- 
tion, which  was  necessary  for  them  alone 
in  their  capacity  of  founders  of  the  first 
Church  and  teachers  of  pure  Christianity 
for  all  times,  conscious  as  they  were  of  a 
higher  degree  of  authority  and  power, 
delivered  to  them  by  the  Divine  Founder 
of  the  Church  himself,  such  as  was  given 
to  no  other  men,  yet  came  forward  as 
little  as  possible  in  a  commanding  manner,* 
and  endeavoured,  as  much  as  in  them  lay, 
to  act  with  the  free  co-operation  of  the 
Churches  in  all  the  circumstances  which 
concerned  the  Church,  as  we  shall  have 
occasion  hereafter  to  notice  more  parti- 
cularly. St.  Peter  and  St.  John,  in  their 
Epistles,  placed  themselves  in  the  same 
rank|  with  the  leaders  of  the  Churches, 
instead  of  claiming  to  be  the  general  go- 
vernors of  the  Churches  over  them.  How 
difficult  must  it  have  been  in  the  Churches 
to  find  one  individual  who  united  in  him- 
self all  the  qualities  requisite  for  the  con- 
duct of  the  affairs  of  the  Churches,  and 
who  alone  possessed  tlie  confidence  of  all 
men !  Far  easier  must  it  have  been  to 
find  a  number  of  fathers  of  families  in 
each  Church,  whose  peculiarities  were 
calculated  to  supply  each  other's  defects 
in  the  administration  of  the  various  offices, 
and  of  whom  one  possessed  the  confi- 
dence of  one  part  of  the  community,  and 
another  that  of  others.  The  monarchial 
principle  in  spirilual  iliings  accords  ill 
with  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  which  con- 
stantly points  to  the  feelings  of  mutual 
need,  and  the  necessity  and  blessing  of 
common  deliberation,  as  well  as  of  com- 
mon prayer.  Where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord,  there  also,  He  promises,  will  He  be 
among  them. 

In  addition  to  this,  it  was  the  custom 
of  Christianity  to  appropriate  to  its  own 
use  existing  forms,  when  it  found  any 
which  suited  its  spirit  and  its  essence. 
Now  there  was  actually  a  form  of  govern- 
ment existing  in  the  .Tewish  synagogues, 

*  [But  they  by  no  means  declined  to  use  autho- 
rity when  needful,  and  to  enjoin  others,  as  Timo- 
thy and  Titus,  to  do  the  same.  See  Tit.  i.  10 — 14. 
1  Tim.  i.  3—8 ;  iii.  5.  Heb.  xiii.  7,  &c.— H. 
J.R.] 

■}•  [St.  Peter,  indeed,  1  Pet.  v.  1,  calls  himself 
an  elder,  but  he  elsewhere  styles  himself  an  Apos- 
tle, and  we  can  hardly  fail  to  observe  that  this  title 
implied  somethins;  more,  "Are  all  Apostles  1" 
1  Cor.  xii.  29.— H.  J.  R.] 


106 


PRESBYTERS    OR   BISHOPS — DEACONS. 


and  in  all  the  sects  which  had  their  origin 
in  Judaism ;  and  this  was  in  no  respects 
a  monarchial,  but  an  aristocratical  form  ; 
a  council  of  the  elderly  men  D*^P.?' 
-rrfiff^vn^oi,  which  conducted  all  common 
allairs.  It  was  most  natural  for  Chris- 
tianity, developing  itself  from  out  of  Juda- 
ism, to  embrace  this  form.  This  form 
must  also,  wherever  Churches  were  es- 
tablished in  the  Roman  empire  among  the 
heathen,  have  appeared  the  most  natural ; 
for  men  were  here  accustomed  from  of 
old  to  see  the  affairs  of  towns  carried  on 
by  a  senate,  the  assembly  of  decuriones. 
That  the  comparison  of  the  ecclesiastical 
administration  with  the  political,  really 
took  place  here,  is  shown  by  this,  that 
the  spiritual  persons  were  afterwards 
named  an  ordo,  the  leading  senate  of  the 
Church,  for  ordo  was  a  word  peculiarly 
appropriated  to  this  rank  of  senators,  ordo 
senatorum* 

]n  compliance  with  this  form  a  council 
of  elders  was  generally  appointed  to  con- 
duct the  affairs  of  the  Churches ;  but  it 
was  not  necessary  that  it  should  be  strictly 
composed  of  those  who  were  the  most 
aged,  although  age  was  taken  very  much 
into  tne  account,  but  age  was  rather  con- 
sidered here  as  a  sign  of  dignity,  as  in  the 
Latin  scnahis,  or  in  the  Greek,  yi^ovffvcx.. 
Besides  the  usual  appellation  of  these 
governors  of  the  Churches,  namely,  Trgecr- 
^vri^oi,  there  were  many  others  also  in 
use,  designating  their  peculiar  sphere  of 
action,  as  iroifjisn^  shepherds  ]*D^'n£)' 
iyofjusnoj,  TTgoscTTWTE?  TWf  uli'K(pvvi  and  one 
of  these  appellations  was  also  iTrKrv-owos, 
denoting  their  office  as  leaders  and  over- 
seers over  the  whole  of  the  Church. 

That  the  name  also  of  episcopus  was 
altogether  synonymous  with  that  of  pres- 
byter is  clearly  collected  from  the  pas- 
sages of  Scripture,  where  both  appellations 
are  interchanged,  (Acts  xx.  compare  ver. 
17  with  ver.  28.  Epistle  to  Titus,  ch.  i. 
verses  5  and  7,)  as  well  as  frotn  those, 
where  the  mention  of  the  office  of  deacon 
follows  immediately  after  that  of  "  epis- 
copi,"  so  that  a  third  class  of  officers 
could  not  lie  between  the  two."]" 


i.  1 ;  1  Tim.  iii.  1—8.  This  interchange 
of  the  two  appellations  is  a  proof  of  their 
entire  coincidence ;  if  the  name  bishop 
had  originally  been  the  appellation  of  the 
president  of  this  church  senate,  of  a  ;;r/- 
mits  inter  pares,  such  an  interchange  could 
never  have  taken  place.  In  the  letter  also, 
which  Clement,  the  disciple  of  St.  Paul, 
wrote  in  the  name  of  the  Roman  Church, 
after  the  bishops,  as  presidents  of  the 
Churches,  the  deacons  are  immediately 
named.     See  chap.  xlii. 

These  presbyters  or  bishops,  had  the 
superintendence  over  the  whole  Church, 
the  conduct  of  all  its  common  affairs,  but 
the  office  of  teacher  was  not  exclusively 
assigned  to  them ;  for,  as  we  have  above 
observed,  all  Christians  had  the  riglit  to 
pour  out  their  hearts  before  their  brethren 
in  the  assemblies  of  the  Church,  and  to 
speak  for  their  edification.  At  the  same 
time,  it  does  not  hence  follow,  that  al!  the 
members  of  the  Church  were  fitted  for  the 
ordinary  office  of  teaching;  there  is  a 
great  distinction  between  a  regular  capa- 
bility of  teaching,  always  under  the  con- 
trol of  him  who  possessed  it,  and  an  out- 
pouring (like  prophecy  or  the  gift  of 
tongues)  proceeding  from  a  sudden  in- 
spiration, and  accompanied  with  a  pecu- 
liar and  elevated  but  transient  state  of 
mind,  and  the  latter  might  very  probably 
descend  from  above  on  all  vital  Christians 
in  those  first  times  of  extraordinary  ex- 
citement from  above,  when  the  divine  life 
first  entered  into  the  limits  of  this  earthly 
world.  On  such  transient  excitements  of 
a  peculiar  state  of  mind  in  individuals,* 
care  for  the  maintenance,  propagation,  and 
advancement  of  clear  religious  knowledge 
could  not  be  made  safely  to  depend,  any 
more  than  the  defence  of  the  pure  and 


times  used  for  a  pastor  in  a  single  parish  at  first, 
as  well  as  for  the  ordaining  ofiicer,  yet  this  name 
might  very  shortly  after  be  ajjpropriated  to  the  higher 
order,  who  had  the  power  of  ordaining.  Immedi- 
ately after  the  apostolic  age,  episcopus  was  used 
for  one,  among  a  number  of  other  clergy,  and  it 
must  surely  then  have  designated  one  of  higher 
power  than  the  rest. — H.  J.  R.] 

*  [The  considerations  adduced  here  lead  us  to 
Philipp.  I  on*^  o''  two  reflections  of  some  importance.     If 

^  these  gifts  constituted  the  warrant  of  unordained 

[This  surely  requires  more  than  mere  asscr-  1  brethren  to  address  the  Church,  when  these  gifts 
fion  and  conjecture  to  support  it.     What  ought    of  an  extraordinary  nature  had  ceased,  none  but 


first  to  l)c  made  out  is  this:  that  the  presbyters 
were  the  rulers  rather  than  the  teachers  of  the 
Church,  and  that  they  ruled  the  Church  by  a  col- 
li'gf,  or  council ;  and  next,  that  the  name  ordv 
arose  from  that  circumstance.  Why  might  not 
ordo  he  applied  to  any  body  of  men? — H.  J.  R.] 

I   [This  admits  of  a  very  dilfercnt  explanation. 
Suppose  it  granted  that  "  episcopus"  was  some- 


the  ordained  ministers  would  have  a  right  to  teach 
the  Church.  Again,  we  are  led  to  think,  that  if  a 
regular  ministry  was  necessary  even  while  these 
gifts  were  bestowed  on  the  Church,  it  must  have 
been  doubly  necessary  after  they  were  withdrawn. 
I  must  refer  my  readers  to  the  preface  to  this  trans- 
lation for  a  few  more  remarks  on  these  ^^^ta^fxxra.. 
H.  J.  R.] 


GIFT  OF   KvB!^>na-K;. 


107 


genuine  apostolic  doctrine  against  tl»e 
manifold  false  tendencies  of  Jewish  or 
heathen  views  which  had  already  thns 
early  begun  to  threaten  the  Church.  Al- 
though oil  Christians  must  be  taught  only 
by  the  one  heavenly  Guide,  yet  regard  to 
the  weakness  of  human  nature,  which  is 
destined  to  keep  the  treasures  of  heaven 
in  earthen  vessels,  made  it  requisite  that 
persons  should  never  be  %vanting  in  the 
Church,  who  were  peculiarly  qualified 
constantly  to  set  strongly  before  their 
brethren  their  relation  to  the  common 
guide  and  Redeemer  of  all,  to  impress  it 
on  their  hearts  forcibly,  to  show  them 
how  every  thing  ought  to  be  viewed  in 
connection  with  this  one  relation,  and  to 
warn  them  against  every  thing  which 
threatened  to  withdraw  them  from  this 
fundamental  principle  of  Christian  life. 
Such  a  capability  of  expounding,  which 
was  always  under  the  control  of  him  who 
possessed  it,  pre-supposed  a  certain  culti- 
vation of  the  intellect,  a  certain  clearness 
and  acuteness  of  thought,  and  a  certain 
power  of  communicating  its  impressions 
to  others,  which,  when  they  were  present 
and  penetrated  and  animated  by  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  of  God,  became  the  yf^x^te^ixx 
StSuffKciXici;.  Those  who  possessed  this 
Charisma  M'ere  on  that  account  appointed 
to  provide  for  the  constant  maintenance  of 
pure  doctrines  in  the  Church,  and  for  the 
confirmation  and  advancement  of  Christian 
knowledge,  without  excluding  the  co- 
operation of  others,  each  in  his  own  sta- 
tion, according  to  the  gift  bestowed  upon 
him.  In  the  apostolic  age,  therefore,  the 
X^^^io-fji-ci  Siiaa-Kcc>.tx<;  and  the  rank  of 
teachers  of  the  Church,  SiSuatcxXoi,  who 
were  distinguished  by  that  gift,  are  men- 
tioned as  something  quite  peculiar,  I  Cor. 
xii.  28;  xiv.  6.  Ephes.  iv.  11.  All  the 
members  of  the  Church  might  feel  them- 
selves impelled  at  particular  moments,  to 
address  the  congregation  of  brethren,  or 
to  cry  out  to  God  and  praise  Him  before 
them,  but  only  a  few  had  that  p^a§»cr/A« 

^»^«(7y.aX(«;,  and  were  StSnaxxXoi. 

But  it  is  also  clear,  from  the  case  itself, 
that  this  talent  of  instruction  is  quite  a 
diflerent  thing  from  the  talent  for  admi- 
nistering the  affairs  of  the  Church,  the 
Xcic^iSf/.a,  Kv^i^vrihui,  which  was  particu- 
larly required  for  the  office  of  an  assessor 
of  the  council,  a  presbyter  or  bishop.* 


[*  Here  again  there  is  a  pointof  great  importance 
disposed  of  most  unsatisfactorily.  Can  it  be  grant- 
ed at  all  that  the  nfiice  of  presbyter  was  merely  of 
this  kind  1  Does  it  not  appear  from  all  that  the 
apostles  say  of  episcopi  and  presbyters,  that  they 


A  man  might  possess  to  a  great  extent 
dexterity  in  outward  matters,  and  Chris- 
tian prudence,  and  in  general  tliose  more 
practical  capacities  whicli  are  required  for 
such  an  office  in  the  Church,  without 
uniting  to  them  the  turn  of  mind  and  the 
cultivation  of  the  understanding  requisite 
for  that  of  a  teacher.  In  the  first  Apos- 
tolic Church,  to  whose  spirit  all  arbitrary 
and  idle  distinction  of  ranks  was  so  fo- 
reign, in  which  offices  being  considered 
only  in  regard  to  the  object  which  they 
were  destined  to  obtain,  were  limited  by 
an  inward  necessity,  the  offices  of  govern- 
ing and  those  of  teaching  the  Churches,* 
the  office  of  a  ^jiJaa-xaXof,  and  that  of  a 
voifAVP  were  accordingly  separated  from 
each  other.l 

The  perception  of  this  distinction  so 
clearly  laid  down,  might  lead  us  to  the 
supposition  that  originally  those  teachers 
of  the  Church,  expressly  so  called,  did 
not  belong  to  the  class  of  rulers;};  of  the 
Churches,  and  certainly  it  is  not  capable 
of  proof  that  they  always  belonged  to 
the  presbyters.  Thus  much  only  is  cer- 
tain, it  Avas  a  source  of  great  satisfaction 
when,  among  the  rulers  of  the  Church, 
there  were  men  qualified  also  for  teachers. 
Although  to  the  presbyters  in  general  (as 
in  St.  Paul's  parting  speech  to  the  presby- 
ters of  the  Church  of  Ephesus,  Acts  xx,) 
the  guardianship  over  the  maintenance  of 
pure  doctrine  was  assigned,  it  does  not 
thence  follow  that  they  had  to  execute 
the  office  of  teacher  in  the  stricter  sense 
of  the  word,  for  the  question  here  may 
merely  have  concerned  the  general  care 
of  the  government  of  the  Church.  But 
when,  in  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  it  is  re- 
quired of  a  bishop  not  only  that  he  should 
for  his  own  part  hold  fast  the  genuine 
pure  doctrine  of  the  Gospel,  but  that  he 
should  also  be  capable  of  confirming 
others  in  it,  and  of  gainsaying  the  adver- 
saries of  it,  it  clearly  follows  that  the 
bishop  was  required  to  possess  also  that 
gift  of  teaching.  This  might,  under  many 
circumstances  of  the  Churches,  as  under 


were  especially  to  see  to  the  maintenance  of  sound 
doctrine  in  the  Church,  that  is  be  its  teachers  1 
See  Tit.  i.     1  Tim.  i.  iu.,  &c.— H.  J.  R.] 

*  The  ^upto-fjix   iiSctTKxXiXi   and  the  x^^'^l^"- 

f  Compare  Rom.  xii.  7,  8,  (for  the  distinction 
between  the  hixTHM^  and  the  w-giwToic)  and  the 
above  cited  passages. 

\  [Gemeindevorsteher.  This  is  the  same  word 
used  in  page  lOG,  and  applied  to  the  presbyters 
which  IVcander  makes  synonymous  with  bishops 
(in  his  explanation  of  the  word  PDi'^fl) — ^- 


108 


DEACONS DEACONESSES. 


those  which  are  spoken  of  in  this  Epistle,  tresses  of  families,  experienced  and  tried 
perhaps  be  particularly  desirable  on  ac-  in  all  the  trials  that  belonged  to  women, 
count  of  the  danger  wliich  threatened  the  they  \veye  to^iiphold  the  younger  women 
Church  from  the  propagation  of  heresies, 
which  the  paternal  authority  of  the  elders 
of  the  Church,  supported  by  their  pre- 
eminence as  teachers,  was  to  oppose. 
Thus  also  in  the  first  Epistle  to  Timothy. 
V.  IT,  tiiose  presbyters  who  were  able  to 
unite  with  the  power  of  ruling  (the 
xv^t^vricru)  also  that  of  teaching  (the 
o'.^ajx«Xi«)  were  especially  honoured, 
which  gives  us  at  the  same  time  a  proof 
that  both  were  not  necessarily  and  always 
united.* 

Besides  this  we  find  only  one  Church 
office  in  the  apostolic  age,  the  office  of 
deacon.  The  business  of  this  office  was 
at  first  only  external,  as  according  to 
Acts  vi.,  it  was  instituted  to  assist  in  the 
administration  of  alms :  care  for  the  poor 
and  the  sick,  belonging  to  the  Church,  to 
which  afterwards  many  other  external 
cares  were  added,  was  peculiarly  the  bu- 
siness of  this  office.  Besides  the  deacons 
there  were  also  established  for  the  female 
part  of  the  community  deaconesses,  where 
the  free  access  of  men  to  females,  espe- 
cially as  the  sexes  are  so  carefully  sepa- 
rated in  the  east,  might  excite  suspicion 
and  give  ofience.  Although  women,  in 
conformity  to  their  natural  destination, 
were  excluded  from  the  offices  of  teach- 
ing and  governing  the  Churches,  yet  in 
this  manner  the  peculiar  qualities  of  fe- 
males were  brought  into  demand,  as  pecu- 
liar gifts  foi*  the  service  of  the  Church. 
Bv  means  of  these  deaconesses  the  Gos- 
pel might  be  brought  into  the  inmost  re- 
cesses of  family  life,  where,  from  eastern 
manners,  no  man  could  have  obtained  ad- 
miltance."!"    As  Christian  mothers  and  mis- 


*  [It  may  be  well  to  mention  that  this  passage 
has  given  rise  to  much  controversy,  and  is  very 
liiffercntly  interpreted.  For  the  satisfaction  of 
the  reader  I  here  transcribe  a  very  different  inter- 
])rr'tation  of  it  from  the  celet)ratod  work  of  bishop 
Bll.son,  on  the  "  Perpetual  Government  of  Christ's 
(Jhurch,"  now  become  a  scarce  book. 

»  Prrslii/fcr.<!,  if  t/ai/  rule  will,  arc  ivarthy  of 
double  liiituiur,  especi<tllii  if  tlici/  liiliimr  in  the 


VMird  :  or  jjrtwlji/tcrs  for  ruliiiir  well  are  ivortlry 
(f  (/iiuhle  honour;  especially  for  labouring  in  the 
irord.  Here  are  not  two  sorts  of  elders  (as  they 
ciinceivej  the  one  to  govern,  the  other  to  teach; 
but  two  duties  of  each  presbyter;  namely,  to 
teach  and  govern,  before  he  can  be  most  worthy  of 
double  honour."  Bilson,  Epistle  Ded.  p.  8,  9. 
Compare  p.   131 — H.  J.  R.] 

f  A  proof  of  tlii.s  cccurs  in  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, Str.  iii.  p.  448,  on  Christian  women : 
ii  Lv  K-JU  4/5  T»iy  -ywHiuttiTi)/    Jtu^\>iTai;  Trxftta-tiurro  )i 


of  the  Church  by  their  counsels  and  con- 
solations.* 

So  far  as  regards  the  election  to  these 
offices,  we  are  without  sufficient  informa- 
tion to  decide  certainly,  how  it  was  ma- 
naged in  the  first  apostolic  times,  and  it 
is  very  possible,  that  from  a  diffi;ience  in 
circumstances,  the  same  method  of  pro- 
ceeding was  not  adopted  in  all  cases.  As 
the  apostles,  in  the  appointment  of  the 
deacons,  allowed  the  Church  itself  to 
choose;  and  as  this  also  was  th^  case, 
when  deputies  were  sent  by  the  Churches 
in  their  name  to  accompany  the  apostles 
(2  Cor.  viii.  19.)  we  may  conclude  that  a 
similar  proceeding  was  resorted  to  in  the 
appointment  to  other  Church  offices.  It 
may  nevertheless  have  happened,  that 
where  the  apostles  could  not  place  im- 
plicit confidence  in  the  spirit  of  the  first 
new  Churches,  they  gave  the  important 
office  of  presbyter  to  those.who  appeared 
to  them,  under  the  light  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  most  fitted  for  it;  their  choice 
would  also  deserve  the  highest  confi- 
dence on  the  part  of  the  Church,  com- 
pare Acts  xiv.  23.  Tit.  i.  5:  although 
when  St.  Paul  gives  Titus  power  to  ap- 
point rulers  of  the  Church,  who  had  the 
requisite  qualities,  nothing  is  thereby  de- 
termined as  to  the  nature  of  the  election; 
it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  an 
election  by  the  Church  itself  is  absolutely 
excluded.  It  appears  to  have  been  part 
of  the  system  of  discipline,  that  the 
Church  offices  should  be  confided  to  the 
first  converted  men,  if  they  had  the  pro- 
per qualifications.  1  Cor.  vi.  16.t  Cle- 
ment of  Rome  brings  forward  the  rule,  as 
if  laid  down  by  the  apostle,  for  the  ap- 
pointment to  Church  offices,  "  that  they 
should  be  possessed  after  the  judgment  of 
approved  men,  vnth  the  consent  of  the 

*  Tertullian  de  Virginn.  velandis,  c.  9,  ut  ex- 
perimentis  omnium  atVectuum  structa;,  ficcile  no- 
rint  caeteras  et  consilio  et  solatio  juvare,  et  ut  nihil- 
ominus  ea  decucurrerint,  per  quae  fremina  probari 
potest. 

i  So  also  Clement  of  Rome,  ch.  xlii.,  says  of 
the  apostles,  that  »*t*  ;^w§*c  Jt-u  mKuq  kh^uts-cvtk 
x.ufit(rTUMoy  Tic  L'Tag;t«c  a^Taiv,  tfcxi^xa-^tvTac  tm 
7r\ejfy.-XTi  a;  ivUK'^vwi  xa/  JisLn'^viu;  tuiv  //eXAiVTODr 
Tri^rtsyiiv. 

[This  appears  to  be  quite  natural,  nay,  almost 
necessary.  Of  whom  could  the  apostles  make 
bishops  and  elders  but  of  some  of  those  first  con- 
verted T  Of  those  not  yet  converted  ?  It  must 
be  from  one  of  these  classes,  unless  they  had  a 
KU|)ply  ready  to  be  sent  to  any  point  they  visited 
themselves. — H.  J.  K.] 


BISHOPS    BECOME    PRIM!    INTER    PARES. 


whole  ChurchP  The  usual  custom  might 
be,  that  on  a  vacancy  in  any  of  these 
offices  the  presbyters  themselves  present- 
ed to  the  Church  another  to  supply  the 
place  of  the  deceased,  and  tliat  it  was  left 
to  the  Church  to  ratify  their  choice,  or  to 
reject  on  definite  grounds*  Where  the 
request  to  the  Church  for  her  consent  was 
not  a  mere  formality,  tliis  method  of  ap- 
pointing to  Church  offices  had  this  bene- 
ficial influence,  that  by  its  means  the  voice 
of  the  larger  multitude  would  be  guided 
by  those  who  were  capable  of  judging, 
all  schisms  would  be  suppressed,  and  yet 
no  person  would  be  obtruded  on  the 
Church,  who  was  not  affectionately  look- 
ed upon  by  them. 

As  to  what  further  regards  the  relation 
of  these  presbyters  to  the  Churches, 
they  were  destined  to  be  not  unlimited 
monarchs,!  but  rulers  and  guides  in  an 
ecclesiastical  republic,  and  to  conduct 
every  thing  in  conjunction  with  the 
Church  assembled  together,  as  the  ser- 
vants and  not  the  masters  of  which  they 
were  to  act.  The  apostles  saw  these  re- 
lations in  this  manner,  because  they  ad- 
dressed their  epistles,  which  treated,  not 
merely  of  doctrinal  circumstances,  but  of 
things  pertaining  to  the  ecclesiastical  life 
and  discipline,  not  to  the  rulers  of  the 
Churches  only,  but  to  the  whole  of  the 
Church.  Where  the  apostle  St.  Paul  pro- 
nounces an  exclusion  from  the  commu- 
nion of  the  Church,  he  represents  himself 
as  united  in  spirit  with  the  whole  Church, 
( 1  Cor.  V.  4,)  supposing  that  for  an  affair  of 
such  general  concernment  the  assembling 
of  the  Church  would  be  regularly  requisite. 

[B.]   The  changes  in  the  Discipline  of  the 
Christian  Church  after  the  apostolic  age. 

The  change  which  had  the  most  exten- 
sive influence  on  the  form  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  in  this  period,  related  parti- 
cularly to  three  points. 

(a.)  The  separation  between  bishops 
and  presbyters,  and  the  development  of 
the  monarchico-episcopal  government. 

(h.)  The  separation  between  spiritual 
persons  and  the  laity,  and  the  formation 
of  a  caste  of  priests,  in  contradiction  to 
the  evangelic  notion  of  the  Christian  priest- 
hood.    And, 


*  Clemens,   44.      Tcwc  K^ritcrTu.bfv'Tuc  utto  ra>v 

\  [This  is  surely  rather  strangely  put.  In  one- 
half  of  the  sentence  the  presbyters  are  rulers  and 
guides,  in  the  other  they  are  only  servants  of  the 
Church.— H.  J.  R.l 


100 

(c.)  The  multiplication  of  Church  of- 
fices. 

With  regard  to  the  first  we  are  without 
precise  and  perfect  information  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  this  change  took  place 
in  individual  cases,  but,  nevertheless,  it  is 
a  thing  which  analogy  will  make  quite 
clear  on  a  general  view.  It  was  natural 
that,  as  the  presbyters  formed  a  delibera- 
tive assembly,  it  siiould  soon  hap'pcn  that 
one  among  them  obtained  the  pre-emi- 
nence.* This  might  be  so  managed  that 
a  certain  succession  took  place,  according 
to  which  the  presidency  should  change, 
and  pass  from  one  to  the  other.  It  is 
possible  that  in  many  other  places  such 
an  arrangement  took  place,  and  yet  we 
find  no  historical  trace  of  any  thing  in 
the  kind;  but  then,  as  we  have  above  re- 
marked, there  is,  on  the  other  hand,  no 
trace  to  be  found  by  which  we  should 
conclude  that  the  office  of  the  president 
of  the  college  of  presbyters  was  distin- 
guished by  any  peculiar  name.  However 
it  may  appear  with  regard  to  this  pouit, 
Avhat  we  find  in  the  second  century  leads 
us  to  conclude  that,  immediately  after  the 
apostolic  age,  the  standing  office  of  pre- 
sident of  the  presbyters  must  have  been 
formed,  to  whom,  inasmuch  as  he  had 
especially  the  oversight  of  every  thing, 
was  the  name  of  ETrnrxoTro?  given,  and  he 
was  thereby  distinguished  from  the  rest 
of  the  presbyters.  This  name  was  then, 
at  last,  exclusively  applied  to  this  presi- 
dent, while  the  name  of  presbyter  remain- 
ed common  to  all :  for  the  bishops,  as  the 
presiding  presbyters,  had  as  yet  no  other 
official  character  than  that  of  presbyters, 
they  were  only  "primi  inter  pares."| 


*  [It  will  not  fail  to  be  observed  here,  that  our 
author  has  recourse  to  conjecture  as  to  what  may 
have  been  the  case,  and  that  in  the  next  sentence 
he  honestly  admits  that  there  is  no  hisforical  trace 
whatever  of  any  such  arrangement.  As  far  as  I 
have  examined  the  subject,  I  find  this  admission 
fully  confirmed.  Its  importance  need  scarcely  be 
pointed  out. — H.  J.  R.] 

f  Many  later  writers  properly  recognise  this 
course  of  things.  Hilar,  in  Ep.  i.  ad  Timoth,  c. 
3.  Omnis  episcopus  presbyter,  non  tamen  omnia 
presbyter  episcopus;  hie  enim  episcopus  est,  qui 
inter  presbyteros,  primus  est.  Jerome  says,  (146 
ad  Evangl.)  it  was  the  custom  in  the  Alexandrian 
Church,  till  the  time  of  the  bishops  Heraclius  and 
Dionysius,  up  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century, 
that  the  presbyters  chose  one  of  their  number  for 
their  president,  and  called  him  bishop.  And  so 
also  there  may  be  some  truth  at  bottom  in  the  story 
told  by  Eutychus,  who  was  patriarch  of  Alexan- 
dria in  the  first  half  of  the  tenth  century,  although 
it  cannot  be  altogether  true,  and  is  certainly  false 
in  chronology ;  viz.  that  in  the  Alexandrian 
Church,  to  the  time  of  the  bishop  Alexander,  in 
K 


110 


FORMATION    OP    A    PRIESTHOOD. 


This  relation  of  the  bishops  to  the  pres- 
byters we  see  continuing  even  to  the  end 
oi'  the  second  century :  Irenaeus,  therefore, 
uses*  the  name  of  '*  bishop"  and  "  pres- 
byter" sometimes  as  wholly  synonymous, 
and  at  other  times  he  distinguishes  the 
bishop  as  the  president  from  the  presby- 
ters. Even  Tertullian  calls  the  leaders  of 
the  Christian  Churches  by  the  one  general 
name  of  Senoires,  while  he  comprehends 
in  that  name  both  bisliops  and  presbyters, 
although  that  father  was  very  particular 
about  the  difference  between  bishops  and 
presbyters.t  Indeed,  in  many  respects 
TcrtuUiun  stands  generally  at  the  line  of 
demarcation  between  the  old  and  the  new 
time  of  the  Christian  Church. 

The  situation  of  the  Churches  during 
the  persecutions,  and  the  numerous  op- 
pressions in  which  the  energetic  conduct 
of  one  man  at  the  head  of  affairs  might 
prove  of  great  use,  furthered  the  formation 
of  the  monarchial  government  in  the 
Church.  And  yet  even  in  the  third  cen- 
tury the  presbyters  were  at  the  side  of 
the  bishops  as  a  college  of  councillors,  and 
the  bishops  undertook  nothing  weighty 
without  gathering  together  this  council.;|; 
When  Cyprian,  bishop  of  the  Church  at 
Carthage,  separated  from  it  by  his  flight 
during  the  persecution,  had  any  thing  of 
consequence  to  transact,  he  instantly  im- 
parted it  to  the  presbyters,  who  remained 
behind  him,  and  he  apologised  to  them 
for  having  been  obliged  at  times  to  decide 
without  being  able  to  call  them  together. 
To  do  nothing  without  their  advice,  he 
declares    to   be   his    constant  principle.§ , 


the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  the  following 
arrangement  had  existed  :  there  was  a  college  of 
twelve  presbyters,  among  whom  one,  as  bishop, 
had  the  pre-eminence,  and  these  presbyters  had 
always  chosen  one  out  of  their  own  body  as  bishop, 
and  the  other  eleven  had  given  him  ordination. 

•  Both  names  arc  used  synonymously,  iv.  26, 
where  he  attributes  the  "successio  episcopatus 
prcsbyteris."  He  distinguishes  the  names  in  iii. 
14.  When  it  is  related  in  the  Acts  xx.  17,  that 
Paul  had  called  to  him  the  presbyters  of  the 
Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  Irenaeus  reckons  among 
them  the  liishops  also,  under  the  view  that  these 
were  then  only  the  presiding  presbyters.  "In 
Miloto  convocatis  episcopis  ct  jiresbyteris."  The 
confusion  which  exists  in  regard  to  the  succession 
of  the  first  bishops  of  Rome,  may  perhaps,  also  be 
attributed  to  this  cause,  that  originally  these  names 
were  not  so  distinguished,  and  therefore,  many 
might  bear  at  the  same  time  the  names  of  bishops 
or  presbyters. 

f  Apologet.  [c  39.  Praesident  probati  quique 
scniores. 

i   Presbytcrium  contrahere. 

^  Ep.  V.  A  primordio  episcopatus  mei  statui, 
nihil  sine  consilio  vestro  mea  privatim  sententia 


Reminding  them  of  the  original  relation 
of  the  bishops  to  the  presbyters,  he  calls 
them  his  "  compresbyteros."  And  it  was 
doubtless,  natural  enough,  that  before  this 
episcopal  system  of  government  could 
firmly  establish  itself,  many  struggles  must 
have  taken  place^  because  the  presbyters 
would  be  inclined  to  maintain  the  original 
power  which  belonged  to  them,  and  re- 
fuse to  subject  themselves  to  the  authority 
of  the  bishops.  Often,  indeed,  many 
presbyters  made  a  capricious  use  of  this 
power,  which  was  very  prejudicial  to  the 
discipline  and  order  of  the  Church. — 
Schisms  arose,  of  which  we  shall  have  to 
speak  hereafter,  and  the  authority  of  the 
bishops,  closely  connected  as  they  were 
one  with  another,  triumphed  over  the  op- 
position of  presbyters,  who  acted  without 
concert.  The  power  and  activity  of  a 
Cyprian  contributed  much  to  promote 
this  victory,  but  we  should  do  him  wrong, 
and  pervert  the  proper  view  of  the  whole 
matter,  if  we  accuse  him  of  having  acted 
from  the  beginning  with  a  decided  inten- 
tion of  raising  up  the  episcopacy,  as  it 
rarely  happens  in  such  matters  that  one 
individual  can  succeed  in  fashioning  the 
occurrences  of  a  whole  period  after  a 
scheme  arranged  to  forward  his  own  love 
of  rule.  Cyprian  rather,  without  being 
conscious  to  himself  of  any  scheme,  acted 
here  in  the  spirit  of  a  whole  party,  and  of 
a  whole  ecclesiastical  disposition,  that  ex- 
isted in  his  time.  He  acted  as  the  repre- 
sentant  of  the  episcopal  system,  the  strug- 
gle of  which  against  the  presbyterian  sys- 
tem was  a  fundamental  feature  of  the 
whole  progress  of  the  Church.  The  con- 
tention of  the  presbyterian  parties  among 
one  another,  might  have  become  utterly 
prejudicial  to  discipline  and  order  in  the 
Church  ;  the  victory  of  the  episcopal  sys- 
tem especially  promoted  unity,  order,  and 
quiet  in  the  Churches-,  but  then,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  was  prejudicial  to  the  free 
development  of  habits  of  the  Churchly 
life,  and  the  formation  of  a  priesthood, 
altogether  foreign  to  the  Gospel  economy, 
was  not  a  little  furthered  by  it.  Thus 
this  change  of  the  original  form  of  the 
Christian  Church  stands  in  close  connec- 
tion with  another  change,  which  takes  still 
deeper  root,  tJie  formation  of  a  caste  of 
priests  in  the  Christian  Church.  The 
more  a  Christian  Church  answered  its 
proper  destination,  and  corresponded  to 
its  true  model,  the  more  must  it  be  shown 


gerere.     Sicut  honor  mutuus  poscit,  in  commune 
tractabioius. 


CONFUSION    OP   THE    OLD    AND    NEW   TESTAMENT. 


Ill 


in  the  mutual  relations  of  all  its  members, 
that  all,  taught,  led,  and  filled  by  the  One, 
all  drawing  from  the  same  fountain,  and 
mutually  imparting,  as  equal  members  of 
the  one  body,  stand  in  reciprocal  relation 
to  each  other  under  the  one  general  Head; 
and  the  less,  therefore,  can  any  difference 
exist  among  them  between  some  to  give 
and  others  to  receive,  teachers  and  learners, 
guides  and  those  who  let  themselves  be 
guided, — as  we  find  it  was  in  the  early 
Churches.  Now  the  very  nature  of  things 
is  such,  that  as  the  first  Christian  spirit 
died  away,  and  as  the  Human  became 
more  prominent  in  the  progress  of  the 
Church,  as  in  the  increasing  Churches  the 
difference  of  education  and  Christian 
knowledge  manifested  itself  more  clearly, 
this  difference  would  also  more  clearly 
develope  itself.  The  leading  preponder- 
ance of  individuals  would  of  itself  take 
continually  deeper  root,  and  it  would 
happen  of  itself,  that  the  presbyters  would 
exercise  a  continually  increasing  influence 
over  the  administration  of  Church  affiairs  ; 
and  that  the  ltleiay.a.Xoi  continually  more 
and  more  exclusively  took  the  task  of  ad- 
dressing the  Church.  All  this  might  fol- 
low of  itself,  from  the  natural  progress  of 
affairs  in  the  Church,  although  it  must 
have  been  the  earnest  endeavour  of  those 
influential  individuals,  if  they  had  been 
animated  by  the  true  spirit  of  the  Gospel, 
and  not  by  an  unevangelic  spirit  of 
party  and  caste,  (which  springs  up  so 
easily  from  the  selfishness  of  human  na- 
ture, the  source  of  all  Popery,)  to  restore 
continually  that  original  relation  of  reci- 
procity between  themselves  and  the 
Church,  and  continually  to  promote  the 
general  participation  of  all  in  the  affairs 
of  the  Church.  And  yet,  besides  that 
which  followed  of  itself  from  the  natural 
course  of  affairs,  there  was  still  another 
idea  mixed  up  imperceptibly  with  it, 
which  was  utterly  foreign  to  the  Christian 
economy,  and  the  inffuence  of  which  be- 
came very  important ;  and  it  was  an  idea 
which  in  aftertimes  was  constantly  intro- 
ducing usages  utterly  repugnant  to  the  es- 
sential views  of  the  Gospel.  We  now 
proceed  to  notice  this  idea. 

The  notions  of  the  theocracy  of  the 
Old  and  of  the  New  Testament,  which 
were  so  decidedly  kept  distinct  from  one 
another  by  the  apostles  and  the  first 
Christians,  became  again  gradually  inter- 
changed and  confused ;  the  source  of 
theoretical  and  practical  errors,  which 
lasted  through  many  centuries,  and  which 
(if  we  except  the  scattered  witnesses  to 


the  truth  in  each  century)  was  first  again 
opposed  by  the  pure  light  of  genuine 
Christianity  by  means  of  the  Keformation. 
As,  in  virtue  of  this  interchange,  many 
notions  of  government,  foreign  to  the 
Gospel,  were  brought  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament into  the  Church  of  Christ,  so  also 
was  the  Old  Testament  notion  of  the 
priesthood  introduced.  The  false  con- 
clusion was  drawn,  that  as  there  had  been 
in  the  Old  Testament  a  visible  priesthood 
joined  to  a  particular  class  of  men,  there 
must  also  be  the  same  in  the  New,  and 
the  original  evangelical  notion  of  a  general 
spiritual  priesthood  fell,  therefore,  in  the 
back-ground.  This  error  is  to  be  found 
already  in  Tertullian's  time,  as  he  calls 
the  bishop  "  sumnius  sacerdos,"  (de  Bap- 
tismo,  c.  xvii.,)  an  appellation  which  was 
certainly  not  invented  by  him,  but  taken 
from  a  habit  of  speaking  and  thinking 
already  prevalent  in  a  certain  part,  at 
least,  of  the  Church.  This  name  also 
imports,  that  men  already  compared  the 
presbyters  with  the  priests,  and  the  dea- 
cons, or  spiritual  persons  generally,  with 
the  Levites.  We  can  judge  from  this, 
how  much  the  false  comparison  of  the 
Christian  priesthood  with  the  Jewish 
furthered  again  the  rise  of  episcopacy 
above  the  office  of  presbyters.  In  gene- 
ral, the  more  they  degenerated  from  the 
pure  Christian  view  into  the  Jewish,  the 
more  the  original  free  composition  of  the 
Christian  Church  became  changed.  We 
see  Cyprian  already  wholly  penetrated  by 
this  intermixture  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  notions. 

In  the  names  by  which  the  Church 
officers  were  distinguished  from  the  re- 
maining part  of  the  community,  we  find 
no  trace  of  this  interchange.  The  Latin 
expressions  "  ordo"  and  "  plebs"  only 
denoted  the  guiding  senate  of  the  Chris- 
tian people;  the  Greek  names  xA»fo?, 
xAu^txoj,  had  even  in  Cyprian's  time  been 
applied  in  this  unevangelic  sense.  By 
this  application  they  were  made  to  desig- 
nate "•  men  consecrated  to  God's  service," 
like  the  Levites  of  the  Old  Testament, 
men  who  busied  themselves  only  with  the 
affairs  of  religion,  and  not  with  earthly 
things,  who  did  not  gain  their  livelihood, 
like  other  men,  by  worldly  business,  but 
on  this  very  account,  that  they  busied 
themselves  with  God  only  for  the  advan- 
tage of  others,  were  maintained  by  the 
others,  just  as  the  Levites  in  the  partition 
of  the  land  had  received  no  inheritance  in 
land ;  but  had  the  Lord  only  for  their 
inheritance,  and  weie   to  receive  tithes 


112  GOSPEL   VIEWS. 

from  the  others  for  their  management  of 
the  Temple  worship,  ot  tltnv  h  x^jj^o?  rov 
©sow  or  u*  0  x>.rj§o«  0  Q^o<;  f5-T»  See  Deu- 
teronomy, ch.  xviii.  This  notion  of  a 
peculiar  people  of  God,  so  particcularly 
applieii  to  a  particular  class  of  men  among 
Ch;isiian?,  as  a  xA»)^o?  rov  ©sot^,  is  certainly 
ill  this  sense  wholly  unevangelic,  for  all 
Christians  ought  in  this  sense  to  be  a 
body  of  men  consecrated  to  God,  a  x^^)Jo? 
Toy  0£ot;,  and  even  all  their  earthly  callings 
ought  to  be  sanctified  by  the  spirit  in 
which  they  pursue  them  ;  their  whole  life 
was  to  become,  by  the  sanctification  by 
which  they  were  animated,  a  spiritual 
service  to  God,  a  Xoytxu  ?i«T^£»a.  Such 
was  the  original  Gospel  notion.  But  the 
inquiry  is  still  to  be  made,  whether  that 
meaning,  which  contradicts  tliis  original 
Gospel  notion,  was  really  connected  from 
the  first  with  the  name  of  xAjj^sxoi  for 
spiritual  persons;  and  if  we  follow  the 
history  of  the  use  of  the  word,  we  shall 
be  rather  inclined  to  conclude  that  this 
meaning  was  introduced  in  later  times 
into  an  expression,  whose  original  mean- 
ing had  been  forgotten.  The  name  xX^p? 
originally  denoted  the  situation  bestowed 
on  each  one  in  the  Church,  either  by 
God's  appointment  or  by  a  choice  deter- 
mined under  his  influence ;  and  thus  the 
Church  offices  were  particularly  called 
x^»Jfo^,  to  be  chosen  to  them  was  called 
yM^ovff^xi,  and  the  men  chosen  to  these 
offices,  x>i*)gixot.* 


•  We  may  thus  explain  how  the  stricter  sense 
of  "  Lot"  was  lost  sight  of  in  this  word,  although 
the  fc§p^5u  xxngavTi)  were  opposed  to  i  p;^a(c  yapcrov)!- 
T£uc.  So  at  lirst  in  the  Acts  i.  17,  xxwgoc  tjjc  Siakc- 
tKtf :  in  Irenasus  iii.  3,  nxsigouvb^t  tuv  iTrt^KO-mv : 
Clemens  Alex.  Quis  Dives  salv.  c.  42,  xxwgo?  and 
KKx^Mv  are  used  reciprocally.  We  find  no  doubt 
in  Clemens  Komanus,  c.  40,  the  relations  of  the 
Old  Testament  applied  to  the  Christian  Church, 
but  certainly  this  letter  (as  well  as  those  of  Igna- 
tius, although  Clemens  is  in  a  less  degree)  has 
been  interpolated  by  some  one  who  was  prejudiced 
in  favour  of  the  hierarchy.*  In  other  passages  of 
the  same  letter,  we  rather  meet  with  the  free  spirit 
of  the  original  presbyterian  constitution  of  the 
Church.     How  simply  in  c.  42,  is  the  appointment 

*  [It  must  be  remembered  that  any  assertion 
of  interpolation,  unsupported  by  evidence,  is  of  no 
value.  1  do  not  deny  the  fact,  I  oiilv  require  proof 
of  it,  if  it  can  be  obtained.  The  latter  sentence 
01  the  autiior's  note  only  states  what  he  thinks 
Clement  ought  to  have  written:  our  question  lies 
solely  with  what  he  did  write.  We  may  also  ask. 
What  contemporary  writings  are  there,  by  a  com- 
parison with  whicli  this  charge  can  be  supported  ? 
It  may  also  be  observed  that  MSS.  can  give  us  no 
a.ssistance  in  such  nn  inquiry,  as  there  is,  I  believe, 
only  one  MS.  of  Clemens  Ilomaniis  in  existence. 
See    Mr.    .lacobson's  very  useful  edition  of  the 


See    Mr.    .lacobson's  very  useful 
Fatres  Apostolici,  p.  i. — II.  J.  II. 


Although  the  idea  of  the  priesthood 
in  a  pure  evangelic  sense,  was,  in  other 
respects,  constantly  more  and  more  dark- 
ened and  driven  into  the  back-ground  by 
the  prevalence  of  that  unevangelic  view 
of  it,  yet  was  it  too  deeply  engrafted  into 
the  very  essence  of  Christianity,  to  be 
wholly  overwhelmed.  At  the  time  of 
Tertullian,  who  stands  on  the  boundary 
between  two  different  epochs  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  Church,  we  still  find 
more  definite  traces  of  the  powerful  op- 
position, which  the  original  Christian 
consciousness  of  the  universal  and  spirit- 
ual priesthood,  and  of  the  Christian  rights 
founded  thereon,  made  to  the  hierarchy, 
which  was  establishing  itself.  In  his  work 
on  Baptism,  which  he  wrote  before  his 
conversion  to  Montanism,  Tertullian,  in 
regard  to  the  use  of  the  general  rights  of 
the  priesthood  by  all  Christians,  declares 
the  true  principle  by  which  Divine  right 
and  human  order  should  be  maintained. 
"  As  far  as  the  thing  itself  is  concerned, 
the  laity  have  the  right  to  administer  the 
sacraments,  and  to  teach  in  the  Churches. 
The  word  of  God  and  the  sacraments 
were  communicated  by  God's  grace  to  all 
Christians,  and  may,  therefore,  be  commu- 
nicated by  all  Christians,  as  instruments 
of  God's  grace.  But  the  inquiry  is  here 
not  merely,  what  is  lawful  in  general,  but 
also,  what  is  convenient  under  existing 
circumstances.  We  must  here  apply  the 
declaration  of  St.  Paul,  'all  things  which 
are  lawful,  are  not  convenient.'  With  a 
view,  therefore,  lo  the  maintenance  of  that 
order  which  is  necessary  in  the  Church, 
the  laity  should  make  use  of  their  priestly 
rights  as  to  the  administration  of  the  sa- 
craments only  where  time  and  circum- 
stances require  it.* 

Sometimes  the  laity  in  their  struggle 
against  the  spiritual  body,  made  good 
their  original  rights  to  the  priesthood, 
as  we  see  from  those  words  of  Tertul- 
lian, as  a  Montanisl.,  in  which  he  requires 
from  the  laity,  in  a  certain  case,  that  if 
they  claimed  the  same  rights  as  spiritual 
persons,  they  should  also  bind  themselves 
by  the  same  duties ;  Avheit  he  says  to 
them,  I"  When  we  elevate  ourselves,  and 


of  bishops  or  presbyters  and  deacons  related  with- 
out any  hierarchical  pride.  We  cannot  for  a  mo- 
ment think  of  any  such  confusion  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testament  ideas  in  a  disciple  of  St.  Paul. 

*  De  Baptisimo,  i.  c.  81. 

■\  De  Monogamia,  12. 

[The  German  is  here  "  Wenn  wir  uns  gcgen 
die  Geistlichkeit  erheben  und  aufbliihen,"  &c. 

I  subjoin  the  original  passage  with  some  of  the 


ALL   LAWFUL   THINGS    NOT    EXPEDIENT. 


113 


are  puffed  up  against  the  clergy,  then  are 
we  all  one,  then  are  we  all  priests,  for  he 
makes  us  all  kings  and  priests  before  God 
and  his  Father."  (Rev.  i.  6.)  Although 
the  office  of  teaching  in  the  congregations 
was  constantly  more  and  more  limited  to 
the  bishops  or  presbyters,  we  find,  nev- 
ertheless, many  traces  of  that  original 
equality  of  spiritual  rights  among  all 
Christians.  When,  about  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  two  bishops  in  Pales- 
tine had  no  scruple  in  allowing  the  learned 
Origen  to  expound  the  Scriptures  before 
their  congregations,  although  he  had  re- 
ceived no  ordination,  and  Dionysius  of 
Alexandria,  a  bishop  of  hierarchical  prin- 
ciples, reproved  them  for  it ;  they  defend- 
ed themselves  by  alleging,  that  many  of 
the  Eastern  bishops  required  the  laity, 
who  were  capable  of  it,  to  preach.*  Even 
in  the  spurious  Apostolical  Constitutions, 
(otherwise  a  very  hierarchical  work,) 
which  consists  of  multifarious  elements, 
gradually  collected  together,  there  is  an 
order  under  the  name  of  St.  Paul  to  this 
effect :  If  any  man^  even  a  laytnan,  be 
skilled  in  the  expounding  of  doctrines, 
and  of  reputable  life,  let  him  teach,  for 
all  must  be  taught  by  God.'f 

At  first,  it  is  highly  probable  that  those 
who  undertook  the  Church  offices  in  va- 
rious congregations,  continued  their  for- 
mer calling,  and  maintained  themselves 
and  their  families  by  it  afterwards,  as  they 
liad  done  before.  The  congregations, 
which  consisted  for  the  most  part  of  poor 
members,  were  not  in  a  state  to  provide 
for  the  maintenance  of  their  presbyters 
and  deacons,  especially  as  they  had  from 
the  very  beginning  so  many  other  de- 
mands on  their  Church  chest,  for  the  sup- 


context,  from  the  edition  of  Georgius.  "  Si  nojj 
oinnes  MonogamisE  tenentur,  unde  Monogami  in 
clerum  1  An  ordo  aliquis  seorsum  debebit  insti- 
tuti  Monogamorum,  de  quo  adlectio  fiat  in  clerum  1 
Sed  quum  extoUimur  et  inflamer  adversus  clerum, 
tunc  unum  sumus,  tunc  omnes  sacerdotes ;  quia 
Bacerdotes  nos  Deo  et  patri  fecit;  quum  ad  perte- 
quationcm  discipline  sacerdotalis  provocamur,  de- 
ponimus  infulas  et  impares  sumus."  Now  the 
part  "  tunc  unum  sumus,"  &c.,  is  clearly  ironical. 
It  is  the  argument  which  the  persons  he  addresses 
were  too  fond  of  using,  and  Tertullian  speaks 
their  language,  and  turns  it  upon  themselves. 
Tertullian  complains  that  those  who  were  so 
ready  to  claim  an  equaidy  of  spiritual  rights 
vjilh  the  priesthood,  were  by  no  means  equally 
ready  to  share  any  burdens  incumbent  on  it.  It 
was  necessary  to  quote  thus  much  to  put  the  rea- 
der in  full  possession  of  the  whole  sense  of  the 
passage. — H.  J.  R.] 

*  Euscbius,  vi.  19. 

t  Book  viii.  ch.  32, 

15 


port  of  helpless  widows,  of  the  sick,  and 
of  orphans.  It  might  happen  that  tlie 
presbyters  belonged  to  the  most  wealthy 
part  of  the  community,  and  this  must 
have  been  often  the  case,  because  their 
office  required  a  certain  previous  secular 
education,  which  would  be  more  easily 
met  with  among  the  higher  or  the  middle, 
than  the  lower  orders.  Since  the  pres- 
byters, or  bishops,  were  to  distinguish 
themselves  among  the  Christians,  to  whom 
they  were  to  afford  a  pattern  in  all  re- 
spects, by  hospitality,  (1  Tim.  iii.  2,)  they 
must  have  belonged  to  the  wealthier 
classes,  of  whom  there  were  not  many 
in  the  first  Churches, — and  how  could 
persons  of  that  kind  have  borne  to  re- 
ceive their  maintenance  out  of  funds  that 
arose  from  the  hard  savings  of  their  poorer 
brethren !  St.  Paul,*  indeed,  expressly 
declares  that  those  who  travelled  about 
to  preach  the  Gospel  were  justified  in 
suffering  themselves  to  receive  the  sup- 
ply of  their  earthly  wants  from  those  for 
whose  spiritual  advantage  they  were  la- 
bouring ;  but  we  have  no  right  from  this 
to  draw  the  same  conclusion  with  regard 
to  the  Church  ofiicers  of  particular  com- 
munities. The  former  could  not  well 
unite  the  business  necessary  to  earn  their 
livelihood  with  the  labours  of  their  spi- 
ritual calling,  although  the  self-denial  of 
a  Paul  rendered  even  this  possible ;  the 
others,  on  the  contrary,  might  perfectly 
well  unite,  at  first,  the  continuance  of 
their  employments  with  the  execution  of 
their  duty  in  the  Church ;  and  the  primi- 
tive ideas  of  Christians  might  find  nothing 
offensive  in  such  an  union,  as  men  were 
persuaded  that  every  earthly  employment 
may  be  sanctioned  by  the  Christian  feel- 
ing in  which  it  is  carried  on,  and  they 
knew  that  even  an  apostle  himself  had 
united  the  exercise  of  a  trade  with  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel.  But  when  the 
members  of  the  Churches  became  more 
numerous,  and  the  duties  of  the  Church 
officers  were  increased, especially  when  the 
office  of  teaching  was  limited,  in  great  mea- 
sure, to  the  presbyters  ;  when  the  calling 
of  spiritual  persons,  if  they  performed  it 
duly,  began  to  require  their  whole  time 
and  activity ;  itwas  often  no  longer  possible 


*  [I  suppose  the  passage  here  alluded  to  is 
1  Cor.  ix.  1 — 14,  and  I  would  request  those  who 
are  interested  in  these  questions  to  read  it  atten- 
tively, and  say  whether  there  is  any  thing  in  it 
which  applies  only  to  persons  tti^o  travelled  about 
to  preach  the  Gospel,  or  rather  whether  it  does 
not  concern  all  ministers,  especially  ver.  13. — 
J  H.  J.  R.] 

k2 


114 


ELECTION   OF    CHURCH    OFFICES, 


for  them  to  provide  at  the  same  time  for 
their  own  support,  and  the  richer  Churches 
were  also  in  circumstances  to  maintain 
them.  From  the  Church  fund,  which  was 
formed  by  the  voluntary  contributions  of 
every  member  of  the  Church,  at  every 
Sunday  service,  or,  as  in  the  North  Af- 
rican Church,  on  the  first  Sunday  of  every 
month,*  a  part  was  used  for  the  pay  of 
the  spiritual  order.  It  was  then  sought 
expressly  to  detach  spiritual  persons  from 
employing  themselves  with  earthly  busi- 
ness;  in  the  third  century  they  were 
already  strictly  forbidden  to  undertake 
any  employment,  even  a  guardianship-! 
This  regulation  might  certainly  have  been 
founded  on  good  grounds,  and  have  an 
useful  object,  namely,  to  prevent  spiritual 
persons  from  forgetting  their  spiritual 
calling,  in  consequence  of  their  earthly 
employments ;  for  we  may  see  from  Cy- 
prian de  Lapsis,J  how  much  even  then 
the  worldly  spirit  had  made  its  way  among 
the  bishops  during  the  long  season  of 
tranquillity,  and  that  they  were  swallowed 
up  with  worldly  affairs,  and  neglected  their 
spiritual  employments,  and  the  advantage 
of  their  congregation.  But  here  also  the 
unevaiigelic  notion  of  a  separate  priest- 
hood, and  a  separate  class  of  priests,  made 
its  appearance  again  clearly,  as  well  as 
an  unevangelic  contrast  between  spiritual 
and  secular  persons.  Now  Ms  false  se- 
paration and  distinction  of  the  spiritual 
persons  very  possibly  might  not  contribute 
to  instil  into  them  a  genuine  evangelical 
feeling,  but  might,  on  the  contrary,  fur- 
ther worldly  feelings,  hidden  under  the 
pretended  holiness  of  spiritual  pride ;  if 
the  clergy  thought  that,  by  a  magical  sanc- 
tity communicated  to  their  order,  inde- 
pendent of  personal  conduct,  they  were 
beings  of  a  higher  order,  and  if  they  fan- 
cied that  by  the  "  opus  operatum"  of  their 
outward  duties  alone,  independently  of 
their  heart  and  conduct,  they  could  draw 


•  The  "divisiones  mensurnse,"  as  the  pay  of 
spiritual  persons  in  this  Church,  correspond  to 
the  monthly  collection. 

j^  Cyprian,  Kp.  Ixvi.  to  the  Church  at  FurniB. 
(Ep.  i.  cd.  Ox.) 

\  Also,  in  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Elvira  (Illil)eris,)i.  305.  "  Episcopi,presl)y- 
tcri,  pt  diaconi  de  locis  suis  negotiandi  causa  non 
deccdant  nee  circumcuntcs  provincias  quscstuosas 
nundinas  sectentur."  And  yet  it  is  here,  also  sup- 
posed, that  in  many  cases  ihcy  might  be  compelled 
"  ad  victum  sihi  conquircndum,"  as  when  for  in- 
stance, if  they  received  any  pay  at  all,  they  received 
none  in  money;  but  then  in  these  cases  they  only 
exercised  their  trade  by  means  of  a  son,  or  a  freed- 
mun,  or  a  person  hired  for  the  purpose,  and  then 
not  beyond  the  limits  of  their  own  province. 


down  and  spread  around  them  Divine 
graces ;  and  if  they  looked  upon  them- 
selves not  as  the  servants  of  the  Church, 
in  the  spirit  of  self-denial,  but  thought 
themselves  supernatural  mediators  and 
priests  for  it.  Cyprian  quotes  as  the  foim- 
dation  of  his  prohibition,  the  passage  from 
2  Tim.  ii.  4,  but  he  feels  thoroughly  (a 
feeling  which  would  then  more  naturally 
strike  every  one,  because  the  character  of 
a  "miles  Christi"  was  then  considered  the 
general  calling  of  all  Christians,)  that  these 
words  are  to  be  applied  to  all  Christians, 
who,  as  soldiers  of  Christ,  were  to  per- 
form their  service  faithfully,  and  to  pre- 
serve themselves  from  every  thing  worldly 
and  uncongenial,  which  might  take  pos- 
session of  their  hearts,  and  render  them 
untrue  to  their  "  sacramentum  militiae  :" 
he,  therefore,  only  concludes  thus : — 
"  How  far,  rather,  inasmuch  as  Ms  is 
addressed  to  all  Christians,  must  those 
remain  unentangled  in  worldly  business, 
who,  busied  with  Divine  and  spiritual 
things,  do  not  stir  from  the  Church,  and 
ought  to  have  no  time  for  earthly  and 
worldly  affairs."  The  clergy  ought  also 
in  the  application  of  that  passage  to  them- 
selves, to  shine  before  the  Church  as  its 
pattern ;  and  this,  indeed,  is  a  just  appli- 
cation of  the  passage!  Only  then  the 
unevangelic  fancy  would  instantly  fasten 
itself  on,  that  man  approaches  nearer  to 
God  by  an  outward  withdrawal  from 
earthly  things,  and  can  become  desecra- 
ted by  the  mere  use  of  these  things,  as  if 
sanctification  and  desecration  did  not  con- 
sist solely  in  the  disposition  of  the  spirit 
and  the  heart  to  God  or  to  the  world. 

In  regard  to  the  election  into  Church, 
offices,  the  old  principle  was,  nevertheless, 
constantly  abided  by,  that  the  consent  of 
the  Church  was  required  to  ratify  such  an 
election,  and  that  the  Church  was  at  liberty 
to  bring  forward  objections  against  it.  The 
emperor  Alexander  Severus  was  aware  of 
this  regulation  of  the  Christian  Church, 
and  he  appealed  to  it,  when  he  wished  to 
introduce  a  similar  course  in  the  election 
of  the  civil  magistrates  in  towns.  When 
Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  separated 
from  his  Church  by  calamitous  circum- 
stances, named  to  Church  offices,  men  of 
his  neighbourhood  who  had  particularly 
distinguished  themselves  in  the  persecu- 
tion, he  apologised  for  this  arbitrary  con- 
duct, which  had  been  wrung  from  him  by 
necessity,  before  the  laity  and  the  clergy, 
and  he  writes  to  both  :*  "  We  are  accus- 


Ep.  xxxiii.     [Ep.  xxxviii.  ed.  Ox.] 


tomed  to  call  you  together  to  consult  pre- 
viously to  the  consecration  of  spiritual 
offices,  and  to  weigh  the  character  and 
merits  of  all  in  a  general  consultation." 

That  principle  was  also  recognised  in 
the  appointment  to  the  episcopal  office;  it 
was  the  prevailing  custom  in  the  third 
century,  and  Cyprian  deduced  it  from 
apostolic  tradition,  that  the  hishops  of 
the  province,  with  llie  clergy  of  the  vacant 
Church,  made  the  choice  in  presence  of 
the  congregation,  who  having  seen  the 
conduct  of  every  one  who  could  possibly 
be  chosen,  could  give,  therefore,  the  most 
sure  testimony  about  them.  Cyprian 
ascribed  to  the  Church  the  right  of 
choosing  worthy  bishops,  or  rejecting 
unworthy  ones.*  This  right  of  approval 
or  rejection,  which  belonged  to  the 
Church,  was  not  an  empty  formality ;  it 
sometimes  happened  that  before  the  usual 
arrangements  for  an  election  could  take 
place,  a  bishop  would  be  called  upon  by 
the  voice  of  the  Church,  and  the  influence 
caused  by  this  upon  the  elections  was  the 
cause  of  many  divisions. 

In  other  affairs  of  the  Church  also,  the 
participation  of  the  laity  was  not  altogether 
excluded.  Cyprian  declares  (Ep.  v.,)  that 
he  had  determined  from  the  beginning  of 
his  episcopal  office  to  do  nothing  without 
the  consent  of  the  community .-f  One  of 
these  Church  affairs,  in  which  all  had  an 
interest,  was  the  reception  again  of  those 
who  had  fallen  away;  and  the  inquiry 
which  regarded  this  matter  was  to  be  un- 
dertaken with  a  meeting  of  the  whole 
Church  ;  for,  according  to  Cyprian's  judg- 
ment, this  respect  was  due  to  the  faith 
of  those  who  had  stood  steadfast  during 
the  persecution.^  There  were,  besides, 
individuals  who  did  not  belong  to  the 
clergy,  and  yet  had  obtained  for  them- 
selves, by  the  reverence  which  they  per- 
sonally enjoyed,  such  an  influence  over 
the  administration  of  Church  affairs,  that 
even  the  clergy  themselves  could  not 
easily  oppose  them.  These  were  the 
heroes  of  the  faith,  those  who  had  made 
their  confession  of  faith  before  the  heathen 
magistrates,  in  the  sight  of  the  tortures 
and  of  death,  or  under  the  torture — the 
"  confessores."  (We  shall,  in  the  course 
of  the  history  of  the  divisions  of  the 
Church,  have  further  occasion  to  consider 


SENOIRES   PLEBIS.  115 

the  greatness  of  their  influence  more  pre^ 
cisely.) 

There  is,  however,  here  to  be  mention- 
ed a  peculiar  arrangement,  which  we  find 
in  the  North  African  Churches  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fourth  century,  and  which 
may,  very  probably,  be  the  remains  of  an 
older  and  more  general  one.  There  were 
a  class  of  leaders  of  the  Church  under 
the  name  of  elders,  "  seniores  plebis," 
who  were  expressly  distinguished  from 
the  clerical  body,  and  yet  were  considered 
as  ecclesiastical  persons,  (personae  eccle- 
siasticae,)  who,  as  the  representatives  of 
the  congregation,  formed  a  middle  class 
between  the  clergy  and  the  laity,  who 
were  assembled  together  by  the  clergy  in 
consultations  on  any  matters  of  general 
interest,  and  who  spoke  in  the  name  of 
the  congregation,  when  any  complaint  was 
to  be  made  against  the  clergy.* 

It  may,  perhaps,  be  said,  that  this  was 
no  old  arrangement,  but  rather  one  which 
took  its  rise  at  a  very  late  period,  namely, 
after  Christianity  had  become  the  prevail- 
ing religion  in  many  cities  and  districts  of 
northern  Africa,  and  that,  as  civil  forms 
had  often  been  transferred  to  ecclesiastical 
business,  the  civil  burgesses  or  aldermen 
became  also  Church  officers,  and  that  a 
particular  place  was  assigned  to  them  in 
the  discussion  of  matters  relating  to  the 
Church.  But  it  is  hardly  probable,  judg- 
ing merely  from  the  thing  itself,  that  in  a 
time,  when  the  hierarchial  principle  was 
so  prevalent,  an  arrangement  so  foreign  to 
the  spirit  of  hierarchy,  and  more  conso- 
nant to  the  oldest  and  free  constitution  of 
the  Church,  should  have  been  first  set  on 
foot.  It  is  far  more  probable  of  itself, 
that  this  regulation  should  have  been  re- 
tained as  a  remnant  of  a  freer  spirit  of 
Church  government,  and  propagated  with 
some  change  in  its  circumstances. 

There  is  a  remarkable  declaration  to 
this  purpose  by  Hilary,  who  wrote  a  com- 


*  Cyprian,  in  the  name  of  a  Synod,  to  the 
Churches  of  Leon  and  Astorga. 

■}•  Nihil  sine  consensu  plebis  gerere. 

I  Ep.  xiii.  [Ep.  xviii.  ed.]  Ox.  prtesente  etiam 
stantiuin  piebe,  quibus  et  ipsis  pro  fide  et  timore 
Euo  honor  habendus  est. 


*  In  a  leUer  from  a  Numidian  bishop,  Pur- 
purius,  to  another  bishop,  Silvanus  of  Cirta  in 
Numidia,  occurs  the  following  passage  .  "  Adhi- 
bete  conclericos,  et  seniores  plebis  ecclesiasticos 
viros."  They  were  required  to  make  inquiry  into 
some  differences  which  had  arisen  between  the 
bishop  and  a  deacon.  In  another  letter  of  the 
same  bishop  to  the  "  clericos  et  seniores"  of  this 
city  Cirta,  all  these  persons  being  classed  together, 
are  desired  to  make  inquiry  into  these  differences, 
and  compared  in  this  respect  to  the  elders,  whom 
Moses  called  together  to  counsel.  "  Sine  consilio 
seniorum  nihil  agebatur.  Itaque  et  vos,  quos  scio 
omnem  sapientiam  coclestem  et  spiritalem  habere, 
omni  vestra  virtute  cognoscite,  qua;  si  dis  sensio 
Ikec  et  perducite  ad  pacem.'  Optat.  Milevit.  de 
schismate  Donatistar.  cd  Du  Pin.  fol.  169, 


116 


SOURCE  OF  SUBORDINATION  SYSTEM. 


mentary  on  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  in  the  j 
fourth  century.  He  says,  "Among  all  | 
people  age  is  honoured,  and  hence  the 
synagogues,  and  afterwards  the  Church, 
had  elders,  without  whose  counsel  noth- 
ing was  undertaken  in  the  Church.  I 
know  not  by  what  neglect  this  has  he- 
come  obsolete,  unless  it  be  by  the  laziness, 
or  rather  by  the  pride  of  the  teachers, 
-who  fancy  that  they  alone  are  of  any  con- 
sequence."* 

The  third,  but  less  important  change  in 
the  constitution  of  the  Church,  was  in  re- 
gard to  the  increase  of  the  Church  offices. 
This  arose  partly  from  the  circumstance 
that  when  the  congregations  became  more 
numerous,  and  the  deacons'  business  was 
much  increased,  much  which  had  hitherto 
been  transacted  by  them  passed  away  from 
them,  and  was  put  into  the  hands  of  other 
officers;  partly  because  many  new  em- 
ployments in  regard  to  the  Churches  arose 
in  the  great  towns ;  and  partly,  because 
what  had  hitherto  been  esteemed  the  free 
gift  of  the  Spirit  on  all,  or  on  particular 
Christians,  was  now  connected  with  one 
particular  office.  There  were  the  fol- 
lowing Church  offices  ;  the  sub-deacons, 
who  attended  the  deacons  in  the  execu- 
tion of  their  outward  duties ;  the  "  lec- 
tores,"  {uva.ypua-Ta.h)  who  had  to  read  the 
Holy  Scriptures  in  the  congregations,  and 
to  keep  the  copies  of  them  used  for  this 
purpose,  a  duty,  which  probably  at  first 
either  the  presbyters  themselves  or  the 
deacons  had  performed,  for  even  in  later 
times  it  remained  the  custom  for  the  dea- 
cons particularly  to  read  the  Gospels ;  the 
acolyths  (ixoXovQoj,)  persons,  as  the  name 
■  implies,  who  attended  on  the  bishop  in 
the  duties  of  his  office:  the  exorcist,  who 
. I 


*  Ecclesia  seniores  habuit,  quorum  sine  consilio 
nihil  agebatur  in  ecclesia.  Quod  qua  neRligentia 
obsolverit  nescio,  nisi  forte  doctorum  desidia,  aut 
mads  superbia,  dum  soli  volunt  aliqui  videri."  In 
order  to  evade  the  force  of  this  passage,  it  may  be 
said  that  here,  under  the  name  of  seniores,  the 
presbyters  arc  understood,  and  that  the  disuse 
consisted  in  this,  that  these  persons  were  no  more 
called  to  debate  by  the  doctors,  /.  e.  the  bishops,  in 
all  matters,  as  thty  had  formerly  been.  But  this 
explanation  is  by  no  means  the  most  natural, 
neither  is  it  apposite  to  the  manner  in  which  the 
word  "doctores,"  nor  that  in  which  the  word 
"  senoires"  is  here  used.  This  is  more  especially 
the  case  here,  because  the  emphasis  is  expressly  I 
laid  on  the  circumstance,  that  the  "  senoires"  were  | 
literally  the  elder  members  of  the  Church;  and 
this  was  certainly  not  true  in  regard  to  the  pres- 
byters, who  were  not  usually  above  thirty  years 
of  age;  and  still  more  also  because  the  passage 
alluded  to  (1  Tim.  v.,)  has  nothing  in  it  to  Ica^ 
one  to  think  of  presbyters. 


perfoi-med  the  duty  of  prayer  over  those 
whom  men  believed  possessed  by  evil 
spirits,  (see  above,)  i.e.  the  '' energumeni ;" 
and  the  6yg«go»,  vvXa^oi.^  "  ostiarii,"  who 
had  the  management  of  such  matters  as 
related  to  the  places  of  assembly,  their 
cleaning,  &c.,and  the  opening  and  shutting 
of  the  Church  doors,  &c. 

The  office  of  reader  is,  perhaps,  the 
oldest  among  these,  it  is  mentioned  by 
TertuUian  (Praescript.  Haeret.  c.  41,)  at  the 
end  of  the  second  century ;  the  others 
made  their  appearance  together  about  the 
middle  of  the  third  century,  and  are  all 
fully  mentioned  for  the  first  time  in  a  let- 
ter of  the  Romish  bishop  CorneUus,  in 
Euseb.  vi.  43.  The  office  of  an  acolyth 
most  probably  arose  from  the  hierarcliial 
love  of  splendour  in  the  Romish  Church, 
and  it  did  not  extend  to  the  Greek ;  and 
the  Greek  name  is  quite  compatible  with 
a  Romish  origin,  by  means  of  the  Greek 
extraction  of  so  many  of  the  Romish 
bishops.  As  far  as  regards  the  office  of 
exorcists,  that  which  was  performed  by 
him,  was  originally  considered  as  a  work 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  connected  with 
any  outward  institution,  whether  it  was 
thought  a  work  that  might  be  performed 
by  every  Christian  in  faithful  reliance  on 
the  overcomer  of  all  evil,  the  Saviour,  by 
calling  on  his  name,  or  whether  it  was 
thought  a  peculiar  gift  of  individual 
Christians.  Now,  it  seems,  the  free  work 
of  the  Spirit  was  to  be  connected  with  a 
lifeless  mechanism  ;  and  yet  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions  properly  express  the  spirit 
of  the  old  Church  in  opposition  to  such 
an  order,  when  they  say,  "an  exorcist 
cannot  be  chosen,  for  it  is  the  gift  of  free 
grace."* 

We  pass  now  from  the  general  consti- 
tution of  the  Churches,  to  the  means  of 
union  in  the  several  Churches  between 
each  other. 

(2)  The  bonds  of  connection  between  the 
various  Churches  with  one  another. 

Christianity  produced  among  its 
genuine  professors  from  the  first  a  lively 
Catliolic  spirit,  and  thence  also  an  inward 
and  mutual  as  well  as  outward  connec- 
tion. This  connection  must,  from  the 
nature  of  human  things,  assume  a  definite 
form,  and  this  form  was  modelled  after 
the  existing  form  of  those  social  connec- 
tions, among  which  Christianity  first 
made  its  appearance,     A  sisterly  system 


*  Lib.   viii.    c.    26,  o'u  ^u^oTcvtirea,  t'jvoki^  ytg 


DAUGHTER-CHURCHES — METROPOLITAN. 


117 


of  equality,  in  the  relation  of  the  Churches 
to  each  other,  would,  independently  of 
these  particular  circumstances,  have  best 
corresponded  to  the  spirit  of  Christianity, 
and  might  have  been  most  advantageous 
to  its  free  and  undisturbed  publication. 
But  these  circumstances  soon  introduced 
a  system  of  subordination  into  the  rela- 
tions of  the  Churches  to  each  other,  into 
which  Christianity  might  enter,  just  as 
into  all  other  human  institutions,  which 
contain  nothing  that  is  sinful  by  its  very 
nature  ;  but  this  system  afterwards  obtain- 
ing too  great  sway,  exercised  a  restraining 
and  destructive  influence  on  the  develop- 
ment of  Christian  doctrines  and  life. 

We  have  before  remarked,  that  in  many 
districts  Christianity  early  extended  itself 
into  the  country ;  and  where  this  hap- 
pened, and  the  Christians  were  numerous 
enough  in  a  village  or  country  town  to 
form  a  separate  Church,  it  was  most  na- 
tural that  they  should  at  once  choose 
their  own  presidents,  presbyters,  or 
bishops,  who  Avould  be  as  independent  as 
those  of  the  Churches  in  the  cities.  In 
the  very  first  centuries,  however,  from  a 
want  of  documents  relating  to  these  times, 
we  cannot  point  out  any  thing  of  the 
kind,  but  in  the  fourth  century  we  find  in 
many  parts  of  the  east  those  called  coun- 
try bishops  {^u^iTrKT-KOTTot.)  who  certainly 
derive  their  origin  from  the  earliest  times, 
for  in  later  periods,  when  once  the  sys- 
tem of  Church  subordination  had  been 
formed,  and  when  the  country  churches 
were  accustomed  to  receive  their  presi- 
dents from  the  city,  a  relation  of  this  kind 
certainly  could  not  have  sprung  up  ;  which 
is  proved  by  the  struggle  of  the  country 
bishops  of  this  time  with  the  bishops  of 
the  cities,  who  endeavoured  to  limit  their 
power.  But  the  more  common  case  was, 
as  we  have  before  remarked,  that  Chris- 
tianity extended  itself  first  from  cities  to 
the  country  round,  and  as  there  were  at 
first  but  few  Christians  in  the  country,  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  city,  it  was 
most  natural  that  they  should  at  first  go 
to  the  city  on  a  Sunday,  in  order  to  fre- 
quent the  assemblies  held  there.  But 
when  afterwards  their  number  so  increased, 
that  they  could  form  a  church  of  their 
own,  they  allowed  the  bishop  of  the 
Church  in  the  city,  which  they  had  been 
accustomed  to  join,  to  appoint  them  a 
presbyter,  who  thence  remained  always 
subject  to  the  bishop.  Thus  arose  the 
first  great  Church  union  between  the 
Churches  [Gemeinden]  of  the  city  and  of 
the  country,  which  together  formed  one 


whole.*  In  the  greater  cities  it  might 
have  already  become  necessary  to  divide 
the  congregations  in  the  city  into  different 
portions,  as  in  Rome,  where  in  the  report 
of  the  Romish  bishop  Cornelius,  which 
we  have  quoted,  we  find  already  six  and 
forty  presbyters,  although  the  account  of 
Optatus  of  Mileve,  that  in  Rome,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  there 
were  more  than  forty  churches  [Kirchen] 
is  an  exaggeration.  Nevertheless,  it  did 
not  always  happen  that  difl^erent  Daughter- 
Churches,  subject  to  the  head  and  Mother- 
Church,  were  formed,  but  it  was  oftener 
the  case  that  the  Church  remained  as  one 
whole,  and  it  was  only  on  Sundays  and 
festivals,  when  one  church  could  not  con- 
tain them  all,  that  they  were  divided 
among  different  churches,  where  the  dif- 
ferent presbyters  conducted  divine  service 
after  a  certain  cycle.  We  are,  however, 
deficient  in  accounts  of  all  that  relates  to 
this  matter  for  this  period,  and  we  can 
only  draw  any  conclusions  by  reasoning 
back  from  what  we  find  in  later  times. 

We  may  further  remark,  that  as  Chris- 
tianity generally  first  spread  from  the 
towns  into  the  country,  so  also  did  it 
generally  extend  itself  (see  above,)  from 
the  capitals  (MjiT^oTrcXei?)  into  the  other 
towns  of  the  province.  As  now  these 
latter  were  politically  subject  to  the 
former,  there  was  gradually  formed  be- 
tween the  churches  of  the  provincial 
towns  and  those  of  the  metropolis,  a 
closer  connection  and  a  relation  of  subor- 
dination. The  Churches  of  the  province 
formed  a  whole,  at  the  top  of  which  was 
the  Church  of  the  metropolis,  and  the 
bishop  of  the  latter  was,  in  regard  to  the 
other  bishops  of  the  province,  "  primus 
inter  pares."  In  consequence,  however, 
of  local  causes,  this  relation  did  not  al- 
ways develope  itself  in  the  same  manner, 
and  for  the  most  part  it  took  place  during 
this  period  only  in  the  east. 

In  the  same  relation,  in  which  these 
metropolitan  towns  stood  to  the  provin- 
cial towns,  were  also  the  chief  cities  of 
the  greater  divisions  of  the  Roman  empire 
to  these  latter,  as  the  seats  of  government, 
and  the  head-quarters  of  commercial  and 
other  intercourse.  From  such  chief  cities 
Christianity  had  spread  itself  into  a  whole 
great  division  of  the  enornious  Roman 
empire  ;  here  the  apostles  themselves  had 
founded     Churches,    appointed     pastors, 


*  Such  presidents  of  country  Churches  were 
those,  of  whom  Cyprian  spoke  at  the  tribunal  of 
the  proconsul,  when  he  said,  "Invenientur  in  civi- 
tatibus  suis." 


118 


ECCLESI.E  APOSTOLIC^. 


preached  the  Gospel  with  their  own 
mouth,  and  they  had  written  Epistles  to 
the  Churches  founded  here  by  themselves. 
These  Churches  were  regarded  with  pe- 
culiar reverence,  under  the  name  of  "  ec- 
clesicB,  sedes  apostolicae,  matrices  eccle- 
sice."  When  any  contest  arose  about 
Church  discipline  or  doctrine,  the  first 
inquiry  was,  "•  How  do  people  look  on 
the  matter  in  those  Churches,  where  the 
principles  delivered  there  by  the  apostles 
themselves,  which  have  descended  from 
generation  to  generation,  have  been  faith- 
I'ully  maintained  r"  Such  "  ecclesiaj  apos- 
tolica"  were  especially  Rome,  Antioch, 
Alexandria,  Ephesus,  Corinth. 

But  all  these  circumstances,  which  met 
together  in  the  Churches  of  the  great 
chief  cities,  centered  in  a  peculiar  degree 
in  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  capital  of  the 
world.  It  was  known  that  the  two  great 
apostles,  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter,  had  taught 
in  this  Church,  and  had  ennobled  it  by 
their  martyrdom.*  From  Rome  a  large 
portion  of  the  west  had  received  the 
Gospel,  from  Rome  all  the  general  con- 
cerns of  the  Christian  part  of  the  Roman 
empire  could  best  be  directed;  the  Roman 
bishops,  as  pastors  of  the  richest  churches, 
had  early  distinguished  themselves  by 
their  benevolence  to  the  most  remote 
Churches,!  and  a  general  interest  united 
all  the  Churches  of  the  Roman  empire 
willi  that  of  the  capital.  In  Rome  was 
the  "  ecclesia;  apostolica,"  to  which,  as 
the  common  Mother-Church,  the  greater 
part  of  the  West  must  appeal.  For  the 
most  part,  whatever  took  place  in  this 
''  ecclesiae  apostolica,"  would  be  best 
known  to  all,  for  Christians  were  con- 
stantly flocking  to  Rome  from  all  quar- 
ters. Tlius  Irenaus,  who  wrote  in  Gaul, 
as  he  sometimes  appeals  to  other  "  eccle- 
siai  apostolica;,"  in  one  passage  particu- 
larly appeals  to  the  "  ecclesia  apostolica" 
in  Rome,  as  the  greatest  and  the  oldest, 
( ihougli  tliis  last  may  be  doubted,)  as  one 
known  to  all,  and  founded  by  the  two 
most  celebrated  apostles,  where  Christians 
meet  together  from  the  churches  of  the 
wliole  world,  and  the  doctrines  delivered 


•  It  is  hyporcritical  to  call  in  question  the  tra- 
dition prrscTvcd  l)y  the  harmonious  testimony  of 
eccU-siastical  anti(iuity,that  St.  Peter  was  at  Rome, 
'i'his  tradition  clearly  comes  down  to  us  from  a 
time  in  which  men  had  not  yet  thought  of  up- 
holding the  supremacy  of  the  Roman  Church  by 
means  of  the  primacy  of  St.  Peter. 

t  Euseb.  Lib.  iv.  c.  23. 


by  the  apostles  would  necessarily  be  ob- 
served.* 

By  means  of  letters,  and  of  brethren 
who  travelled  about,  even  the  most  remote 
Churches  of  the  Roman  empire  were  con- 
nected together.  When  a  Christian  ar- 
rived in  a  strange  town,  he  first  inquired 
for  the  Church  [Gemeinde,  literally  con- 
gregation,] and  he  was  here  received  as  a 
brother,  and  provided  with  every  thing 
needful  for  his  spiritual  or  corporeal  sub- 
stance. But  since  deceivers,  spies  with 
evil  intentions,  and  false  teachers,  who 
sought  only  to  propagate  their  unevan- 
gelical  doctrines  among  the  simple-minded 
Christians,  abused  the  confidence  and  the 
kindness  of  Christians,  some  measures  of 
precaution  became  necessary,  in  order  to 
avert  the  many  injuries  which  might  re- 
sult from  this  conduct.  An  arrangement 
was,  therefore,  introduced,  that  only  such 
travelling  Christians  should  be  received, 
as  brethren,  into  Churches  where  they 
were  strangers,  as  could  produce  a  testi- 
monial from  the  bishop  of  the  Church 
from  which  they  came.  They  called  these 
Church   letters,  which   were  a  kind  of 


*  Lib.  iii.  c.  3,  in  the  Latin  translation,  for, 
alas !  the  Greek  original  is  lost.  "  Ad  banc  cc- 
ciesian  propter  potiorem  principalitatem  necesse 
est,  omneni  convenire  ecclesiam,  hoc  est,  eos,  qui 
sunt  undique  fideles,  in  qua  semper  ab  his,  qui 
sunt  undique,  conservata  est  ea,  quae  est  ab  apos- 
tolis  traditio."  If  we  understand  "convenire"  in 
an  intellectual  sense,  thus — All  the  Churches  must 
agree  with  the  Romish  Church,  as  that  which  has 
the  pre-eminence, — the  passage  atTords  no  natural 
meaning,  and  far  less  such  an  one  as  would  suit 
the  other  ideas  of  Irenteus.  What  would  be  the 
sense  of  saying :  The  Churches  in  the  whole  world 
have  in  the  Romish  Church  retained  the  aposto- 
lical traditions'!  This  could  only  be  understood 
to  mean,  that  the  Romish  Church  was  the  central 
and  representative  point  of  all  Christian  Churches, 
as  if  (which  was  said  in  later  times)  the  whole 
Church  was  "  virtualiter"  contained  in  the  Romish ; 
a  notion  of  which  no  trace  whatever  can  be  found 
in  IrensEUs,  and  an  expression  which  is  entirely 
foreign  to  this  whole  period.  And,  besides,  what 
need  would  there  then  have  been  of  the  explana- 
tory addition,  "eos  qui  sunt  ubique  fideles,"  as 
with  such  a  context  there  could  be  no  misunder- 
standing about  the  word  "ecclesia."  But  all  be- 
comes quite  clear,  if  we  understand  "  convenire''' 
of  appearing  personally,  and  then  this  addition  is 
quite  in  place  to  show  that  here  he  is  speaking  of 
the  Churches,  not  as  a  whole,  but  only  of  indivi- 
dual believers  out  of  all  Churches.  Instead  of 
"  conservare"  we  must  then  read  "  observare." 
Compare  the  similar  passage  of  Athenaeus,  lib.  iii.  p. 
20,  about  the  confluence  of  all  cities  and  people  to 
the  cig-jivcvoKi;  Rome,  ort  o'uojjuivh  Sh/uc;  n  fa^x,  » 
pa>/unjet>v  TrrjXK  iTrncfui  rui  oinw/utvui,  ev  «  avvsJuv  icrTU 
'■jlmt!  7ra.7a;  to.:  Trohit;  lifufjiefx;. 


PROVINCIAL   SYNODS    FIRST   IN   GREECE. 


"tesserae  hospitales,"  by  which  the  Chris- 
tians of  all  quarters  of  the  world  were 
brought  into  connection,  "  epistolae"  or 
"•  literai  formatrc,"  (y^a^/^ara  riTviruif/.ttoi,) 
because,  in  order  to  avoid  forgery,  they 
were  made  after  a  certain  schema,*  (twtto;, 
forma,)  or  else  "  epistolae  communicatoriaj, 
y^ccfA.y.ctTct  xoiKUKj^a."  because  they  con- 
tained a  proof  that  those  who  brought 
them  were  in  the  communion  of  the 
Church,  as  well  as  that  the  bishops, 
who  mutually  sent  and  received  such 
letters,  were  in  connection  together  by  the 
communion  of  the  Church ;  and  afterwards 
these  Church  letters  (epistolae  clericae) 
were  divided  into  different  classes,  ac- 
cording to  the  difference  of  their  purposes. 
As  we  above  remarked  that  a  closer 
bond  of  union  was  early  formed  between 
the  Churches  of  the  same  province,  so 
also  the  Christian  catholic  spirit  [Gemein- 
geist]  introduced  the  custom  that,  in  all 
pressing  matters,  controversies  on  doc- 
trinal points,  things  relating  to  the  eccle- 
siastical life,  and  very  commonly  in  those 
relating  to  Church  discipline,  general  de- 
liberations should  be  held  by  deputies 
from  these  Churches.  Such  assemblies 
become  familiar  to  us  in  the  controversies 
about  the  time  of  celebrating  Easter,  and 
in  the  transactions  about  the  Montanistic 
prophecies,  in  the  last  half  of  the  second 
century.  But  these  provincial  synods  do 
not  appear,  as  a  constant  and  regular 
institution,  fixed  to  definite  times,  until 
about  the  end  of  the  second  or  the  be- 
ginning of  the  third  century  ;  and  it  was 
in  this  case  the  peculiarity  of  one  coun- 
try, where  particular  local  causes  may 
have  introduced  such  an  arrangement  ear- 
lier than  in  other  regions.  This  country 
was  in  fact  exactly  Greece,  where,  from 
the  time  of  the  Achaic  league,  the  system 
of  confederation  had  maintained  itself; 
and  as  Christianity  is  able  to  connect 
itself  with  all  the  peculiarities  of  a  peo- 
ple, provided  they  contain  nothing  immo- 
ral, and  entering  into  them,  to  take  itself 
a  peculiar  form  resembling  them,  so  also 
it  might  easily  happen,  that  here  the  civil 
federal  spirit,  which  already  existed,  work- 
ed upon  the  ecclesiastical  catholic  spirit, 
and  gave  it  earlier  than  in  other  regions  a 
tolerably  good  form,  so  that  out  of  the 
representative  assemblies  of  the  civil  com- 
munities, (the  Amphictyonic  councils,) 
were  formed  the  representative  assemblies 


*  We  may  see  from  Cyprian,  Ep.  iii.  (vii.  ed. 
Ox.)  and  Euseb.  iv.  23,  how  necessary  it  was  to 
guard  against  counterfeits  of  these  letters. 


119 

of  the  ecclesiastical  communities,  (i.  e. 
the  provincial  synods.)  As  the  Chris- 
tians, in  the  consciousness  that  they  are 
nothing,  and  can  do  nothing,  without  the 
Spirit  from  above,  were  accustomed  to 
begin  all  important  business  with  prayer, 
they  prepared  themselves  here  also  for 
their  general  deliberations  by  common 
prayer,  at  the  opening  of  those  assemblies 
to  Him,  who  has  promised  that  He  will  en- 
lighten and  guide,  by  his  Spirit,  those  who 
believe  in  Him,  if  they  will  give  them- 
selves up  to  Him  wholly,  and  that  He  will 
be  amongst  them,  where  they  are  gathered 
together  in  his  name.* 

It  appears  that  this  regular  institution 
met  at  first  with  opposition  as  an  inno- 
vation, so  that  Tertullian  felt  himself 
called  upon  to  stand  up  in  its  defence.! 
Nevertheless,  the  ruling  spirit  of  the 
Church  decided  for  this  institution,  and 
down  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century, 
the  annual  provincial  synods  appear  to 
have  been  general  in  the  Church,  if  we  may 
draw  this  conclusion  from  the  tact,  that  we 
find  them  prevalent,  at  the  same  time,  in 
parts  of  the  Church  as  far  distant  from  each 
other  as  North  Africa  and  Cappadocia.J 

These  provincial  synods  might  certainly 
become  very  useful  for  the  Churches,  and, 
in  many  respects,  they  did  become  so. 
By  means  of  a  general  deliberation,  the 
views  of  individuals  might  mutually  be 
enlarged  and  corrected ;  wants,  abuses, 
and  necessary  reforms,  might  thus  more 
easily  be  mutually  communicated,  and  be 
deliberated  on  in  many  different  points  of 
view,  and  the  experience  of  every  indivi- 
dual, by  being  communicated,  might  be 
made  useful  to  all.  Certainly,  men  had 
every  right  to  trust  that  Christ  would  be 
among  them,  according  to  his  promise, 
and  would  lead  those,  who  were  assem- 
bled in  his  name^  by  his  Spirit.  Certainly, 
it  was  neither  enthusiasm  nor  hierarchical 
presumption,  if  the  deputies  collected  to- 
gether to  consult  upon  the  affairs  of  their 
Churches,  and  the  pastors  of  these 
Churches,  hoped  that  a  higher  Spirit  than 


*  The  following  passage  is  from  Tertullian,  in  a 
book  written  at  the  beginning  of  the  third  century, 
De  Jejuniis,  c.  xiii.  "  Auguntur  per  Gra!cias  ilia  cer- 
tis  in  locis  concilia,  per  quse  cl  altiora  qua^que  in 
commune  tractantur  et  ipsa  irprnesentatio  totius 
nominis  Christian!  magna  vcncratione  celebratur." 

j  Ista  solemnia,  quibus  tunc  proesens  palroci- 
natus  est  sermo. 

i  Cyprian,  Ex.  xl.,  and  Firmilianus  of  Cffisa- 
rea,  in  Cappadocia,  in  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixxv.  "  Ne- 
cessario  apud  nos  fit,  ut  per  singulos  annos 
seniores  et  prtepositi  in  unum  conveniamus,  ad 
disponenda  ea,  quae  curse  nostrjE  commissa  sunt." 


120 


OUTWARD   AND   INWARD   UNITY    CONFUSED. 


that  of  man  by  His  illumination,  would 
show  them  wliat  they  could  never  find 
by  their  own  reason,  whose  insufficiency 
thev  felt  deeply,  if  it  were  left  to  itself. 
It  would  far  rather  have  been  a  proud 
self-confidence,  had  they  been  so  little 
acquainted  with  the  shallowness  of  their 
own  heart,  the  poverty  of  human  reason, 
and  the  self-deceits  of  human  wisdom,  as 
to  expect  that,  without  the  influence  of 
that  higher  Spirit  of  holiness  and  truth, 
tliey  could  provide  sufficiently  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  their  Churches. 

But  this  confidence,  in  itself  just  and 
salutary,  took  a  false  and  destructive  turn, 
when  it  was  not  constantly  accompanied 
bv  the  spirit  of  humility  and  self-watch- 
fulness, with  fear  and  trembling ;  when 
men  were  not  constantly  mindful  of  the 
important  condition  under  which  alone 
man  could  hope  to  share  in  the  fulfilment 
of  that  promise,  in  that  Divine  illumina- 
tion and  guidance — the  condition,  that 
they  were  really  assembled  in  the  name 
of  Christ,  in  lively  faith  in  Him,  and 
honest  devotion  to  Him,  and  prepared  to 
sacrifice  their  own  wills ;  and  when  peo- 
ple gave  themselves  up  to  the  fancy,  that 
such  an  assembly,  whatever  might  be  the 
hearts  of  those  who  were  assembled,  had 
unalienable  claims  to  the  illumination  of 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  for  then,  in  the  confu- 
sion and  the  intermixture  of  human  and 
Divine,  men  were  abandoned  to  every 
kind  of  self-delusion,  and  the  formula, 
''  by  the  suggestion  of  the  Holy  Spirit," 
(Spirito  sancto  suggerente)  might  become 
a  pretence  and  sanction  for  all  the  sug- 
gestions of  man's  own  will. 

And  further,  the  provincial  synods 
would  necessarily  become  prejudicial  to 
the  progress  of  the  Churches,  if,  instead 
of  providing  for  the  advantage  of  the 
Churches  according  to  the  changing  wants 
of  each  period,  they  wished  to  lay  down 
unchanging  laws  in  changeable  things. 
Evil  was  it  at  last,  tliat  die  participation 
of  the  Churches  [Gemeinden]  was  entirely 
excluded  from  tlicse  synods,  that  at  length 
the  bishops  alone  decided  every  thing  in 
them,  and  that  their  power,  by  means  of 
their  connection  with  each  other  in  these 
synods,  was  constantly  on  the  increase. 

As  tlie  provincial  synods  were  also  ac- 
customed to  communicate  their  resolu- 
tions to  distant  bishops,  in  weighty  mat- 
ters of  general  concernment,  they  were 
serviceable,  at  the  same  time,  towards 
setting  distant  parts  of  the  Church  in  con- 
nection with  each  other,  and  maintaining 
that  connection. 


(3.)  The  Union  of  the  lohole  Church  into 
one  whole,  closely  bound  together  in  all  its 
parts — The  external  Unity  of  the  Rornisk 
Church. 

Thus,  from  the  obscure  grain  of  mus- 
tard-seed, sown  in  the  world's  field,  did 
the  tree  proceed,  which  increased  above 
all  the  produce  of  the  earth,  and  its 
branches  extended  themselves  in  all  direc- 
tions; namely,  this  great  whole  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  which  in  all  its  scattered 
parts  was  still  firmly  united,  and  which, 
in  its  origin,  its  development,  and  its  con- 
stitution, was  utterly  different  from  all 
mere  human  institutions.  The  conscious- 
ness of  being  a  member  of  such  a  body, 
victorious  over  every  opposition  of  earthly 
power,  and  destined  for  eternity,  must 
have  been  more  lively  and  more  powerful 
in  those  who,  having,  in  their  earlier 
years  of  heathenism,  known  no  bonds  of 
union  except  those  of  a  political  and  se- 
cular nature,  had  been  blessed  with  no 
feelings  of  such  a  moral  and  spiritual 
bond  of  unity,  which  bound  mankind 
together,  as  all  members  of  the  same  hea- 
venly community.  Therefore,  must  this 
feeling  have  been  stronger  and  more  lofty, 
when  all  powers  from  without  sought  in 
vain  to  tear  this  bond  in  sunder.  Justly 
might  this  unity,  which  revealed  itself 
outwardly,  this  close  bond  of  outward 
connection,  be  of  great  importance  to 
Christians,  as  the  symbol  of  that  higher 
life,  by  the  participation  in  which  all 
Christians  were  to  be  united  together,  as 
the  revelation  of  the  unity  of  the  king- 
dom of  God.  In  the  outward  communion 
of  the  Church  they  perceived  the  blessing 
of  the  inward  communion  of  the  invisi- 
ble kingdom  of  God,  and  they  struggled 
for  the  maintenance  of  that  unity,  partly 
against  the  idealistic  sects,  who  tlireatened 
to  tear  in  sunder  tlie  inward  bond  of  reli- 
gious communion,  the  bond  of  faitli,  to 
introduce  also  into  the  Christian  Church 
the  old  division  between  a  religion  for 
those  in  a  high  state  of  cultivation  and  a 
religion  for  the  people  (wio-TK  a»cl  a^wo-j?,) 
and,  as  Clement  of  Alexandria  justly  ac- 
cused them,  to  distract  the  one  Church, 
and  divide  it  into  a  multitude  of  theoso- 
phic  schools;*  and  partly  against  those 
who,  blinded  by  self-will  or  passion, 
founded  divisions  on  mere  outward  causes, 
while  they  agreed  in  faith  with  the  rest. 

But  this  polemical  spirit,  though  it  pro- 
ceeded   from  a  lively   Christian   feeling, 

*  The  words  of  Clement  (Str.  vii.  755,)  arc, 


OUTWARD    AND   INWARD   UNITY    CONFUSED. 


which  deeply  felt  the  blessing  of  religious 
communion,  this  inward  life  in  the 
Church,  though  it  proceeded  from  a  truly 
Christian  source  of  warmth,  was  apt  to 
seduce  men  into  the  opposite  extreme 
of  overprising  the  external  unity  of  the 
Church,  and  of  overprising  the  existing 
forms  in  the  Church,  with  which  that 
unity  was  combined.  As  men  in  the 
churchly  life,  as  long  as  it  proceeded  from 
inward  feelings  of  Christianity,  and  was 
still  animated  and  penetrated  by  them, 
and  ere  it  had  been  benumbed  in  dead 
forms,  became  conscious  of  this  intimate 
connection  between  the  visible  and  the  in- 
visible Church ;  as  men,  in  the  commu- 
nion of  this  visible  Church,  felt  deeply 
the  blessing  of  communion  with  the  Re- 
deemer and  with  the  whole  body  of  saints, 
which  receives  its  Divine  living  powers 
from  Him,  its  head,  and  spreads  them 
among  its  individual  members ;  it  was 
more  likely  on  that  account,  in  this  po- 
lemical contrast,  that  they  should  be  led 
away,  so  as  too  closely  to  interweave 
in  idea  also,  that  which  had  been  thus 
joined  and  melted  together  in  the  experi- 
ence and  the  feelings  of  every  one,  and 
also  to  lay  it  down  in  theory,  that  it  was 
bound  together  in  a  necessary  and  indis- 
soluble union.  And  thus  then  arose  the 
confusion  between  the  visible  and  the  in- 
visible Church,  the  confusion  of  the  in- 
ward union  of  the  invisible  Church,  an 
imion  of  spirit  which  consists  in  faith  and 
love,  with  the  outward  unity  of  the  visible 
Church,  which  is  dependent  on  certain 
and  outward  forms.  As  these  forms  of 
the  Church  were  the  instruments  through 
which,  by  means  of  the  feelings  engen- 
dered on  these  forms,  men  had  received 
the  blessing  of  communion  with  the  in- 
visible Head  of  the  Church,  they  were 
more  easily  induced  too  closely  to  join 
together  form  and  essentials,  the  vessel 
of  clay  and  the  inestimable  heavenly 
treasure,  to  attribute  too  much  to  the 
earthly  form,  and  to  consider  a  subjec- 
tive union,  in  the  life  and  hearts  of  in- 
dividuals, as  an  objective  and  necessary 
one.  The  principle  would  form  itself  in 
the  following  mode  :  the  external  Church, 
which  exists  in  this  visible  outward  form, 
is,  with  all  these  outward  forms,  a  Divine 
institution  ;  we  cannot  make  a  distinction 
here  between  human  and  Divine;  under 
this  form  has  the  Church  received  Divine 
things  from  Christ,  and  only  under  this 
form  does  she  communicate  them,  and  he 
alone  can  receive  them  who  receives  them 
from  her  in  this  outward  form.  The  in- 
16 


121 

visible  Church,  the  kingdom  of  God,  is 
represented  in  this  outward  form  ;  and  in- 
ward communion  with  that  invisible 
Church,  as  well  as  the  participation  of  all 
her  advantages,  is  necessarily  connected 
with  outward  communion  with  this  ex- 
ternal Church,  which  exists  in  these 
forms. 

The  confusion  between  the  views  of 
the  Old  and  those  of  the  New  Testament 
on  the  theocracy,  which  we  remarked 
above  in  the  notions  of  the  priesthood, 
also  made  its  appearance  again  here.  As 
in  the  Old  Testament,  the  establishment 
and  the  extension  of  tlie  theocracy  Avas 
necessarily  connected  with  many  outward 
earthly  things,  which  vvere  only  shadows 
and  figures  of  that  which  was  to  appear 
in  all  its  reality  in  Christianity,  men 
Would  have  it,  that  the  theocracy  of  the 
New  Testament  must  also  depend  for  its 
establishment  and  propagation  on  similar 
visible  and  earthly  things  ;  as  the  theoc- 
racy of  the  Old  Testament  was  necessarily 
joined  with  a  definite  outward  and  visible 
priesthood,  so  also  they  would  have  it,  that 
that  of  the  New  Testament  was  also  ne- 
cessarily joined  with  an  outward  priest- 
hood of  the  same  sort,  divinely  founded 
also.  Men  forgot  that  tlie  difference  be- 
tween the  Church  of  Christ  and  the  the- 
ocracy in  the  Old  Testament,  did  not 
merely  consist  in  the  difference  of  out- 
ward signs  and  forms,  but  tliat  there  was 
a  far  more  important  distinction  in  the  re- 
lation of  the  outward  to  the  inward,  of 
earthly  things  to  heavenly  and  spiritual 
things.  This  is  a  most  essential  error, 
and  has  been  the  source  of  many  other 
errors,  with  consequence  of  practical  im- 
portance, which  afterwards  gradually  un- 
folded themselves. 

We  find  this  confusion  between  the 
conception  of  the  invisible  and  the  visible 
Church,  and  the  doctrine  which  M'as  de- 
duced from  it,  of  an  outward  Church 
which  could  alone  confer  salvation,  and 
hence  of  a  necessary  outward  unity  of 
that  Church,  first  most  decidedly  pro- 
nounced and  carried  through  most  logic- 
ally, in  the  remarkable  book  on  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  (de  unitate  ecclesia;,')  which 
Cyprian,  the  bishop  of  Carthage,  wrote 
after  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  in 
the  midst  of  the  divisions  with  which  he 
had  to  contend.  This  book  contains  a 
striking  mixture  of  falsehood  and  truth. 
If  we  understand  what  Cyprian  says,  as 
referring  to  the  communion  of  a  higher 
life,  to  the  necessary  inward  union  with 
1  the  one  divuie  source  of  life  in  Christ, 


CYPRIAN    DE   tNITATE. 


122 

from  which  alone  true  life  can  flow  forth 
on  all  the  members  of  the  communion  of 
saints,  and  to  the  necessary  communion 
between  this  body  and  their  head,  through 
llie   direction  of  the   heart  in  faith  and 
feelings : — if  we  introduce  into  the  con- 
clusions  of  Cyprian,  the  difference  be- 
tween a  visible  and  an  invisible  Church, 
between  the  inward  unity  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  and  tiie  outward  unity  of  a  visible 
Church  ;  between  an  inward  communion 
witli  the  Church  of  the  redeemed,  and  an 
outward   connection  with  a  certain  out-  j 
ward    form,   under  which    that  Church, 
whose    foundations   are   in    the    inward 
heart,  in  faith  and  in  love,  appears  ; — then, 
indeed,  we  shall  find  much  truth  in  what 
he  says  against  a  proud  and  self-seeking 
spirit,  whicli  struggles  to  get  free  from  its 
connection  with  the  one  kingdom  of  God, 
wliose  licad,  foundation,  and  centre-point, 
is  Christ,  and  is  anxious  to  set  itself  up 
as  something  independent.     "Only  en- 
deavour," says   Cyprian,   "to   free   the 
sunbeam  from  the  sun  !  the  unity  of  light 
Avill   not  be  broken.     Break  the  branch 
from  the  tree,  and  it  can  bear  no  fruit ! 
Dissever  the  stream  from  the  source,  and 
it   dries   up!      Thus   also    the    Church, 
beamed  upon  by  the  light  of  the  Lord, 
extends  its  beams  over  all  the  world,  but 
it  is  still  only  one  light,  which  spreads 
itself  into  all  directions  ;  from  the  bosom 
of  that  Church  are  we  all  born,  nourished 
by  her  milk,  and  animated  by  her  spirit. 
That  which  is  torn  asunder  from  the  ori- 
ginal stem,  can  neither  breathe,  nor  live 
separate  and  independent."*     1'his  is  cer- 
tainly all  just  enough,  if  we  understand  by 
that  original  whole,  in  connection  with 
which  alone  each  individual  can  thrive, 
the    invisible   Church    of  the   redeemed 
under  their  invisible  head,  Christ;  if  we 
attribute  that  unity  only  to  spiritual  com- 
munion, and   that  separation   only  to  a 
separation  in  heart ;  but  the  fundamental 
error,   by   which   every  thing  which    is 
really  true  in  itself  received  a  false  appli- 
cation,  was    the    transference    of    these 
notions    from   all    this    to   an    external 
Church,  appearing  under  distinct  outward 
forms,  and  necessarily  dependent  on  them  ; 
a  Church,  which  had  maintained  itself 
from  the  time  of  the  apostles,  under  its 
existing   constitution,  by  means  of  the 
bishops,  its  pillars,  the  successors  of  the 
apostles,  and   the   heirs  of  the   power, 


•  [See  Cyprian,  p.  108,  ed.  Fell.  Thia  is  the 
substance  of  a  part  of  Cyprian's  treatise,  hut  not 
a  literal  translation  of  any  part  of  it. — H.  J.  R.] 


which  had  been  delivered  to  the  apostles. 
Christ,  according  to  this  view,  had  im- 
parted to  the  apostles,  and  the  apostles,  by 
ordination,  had  imparted  to  the  bishops, 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  by  means 
of  this  external  transmission,  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  which  alone  all 
religious  acts  can  receive  their  true  effi- 
ciency, was  shed  abroad  and  preserved 
to  all  times  through  the  succession  of 
bishops.  Thus  by  this  living  and  con- 
stantly progressing  organization  of  the 
Church,  was  maintained  that  Divine  life, 
which  is  imparted  by  this  intermediate 
step  from  the  head  to  all  the  members 
that  remain  in  union  with  this  organiza- 
tion ;  and  he  who  cuts  himself  oft"  from 
outward  communion  with  this  outward 
organization,  shuts  himself  out  from  that 
Divine  life  and  from  the  way  to  salvation. 
N  o  one  can,  as  an  isolated  individual,  by 
faith  in  the  Redeemer,  receive  a  share  in 
the  Divine  life,  which  proceeds  from  Him ; 
no  one  can,  by  this  faith  alone,  secure  for 
himself  all  the  advantages  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  but  to  all  this  man  can  alone 
attain  by  the  instrumentality  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church,  which  has  been  preserved  by 
the  succession  of  bishops. 

Now  those  who  conceived  the  spirit 
of  the  New  Testament  with  a  more  un- 
prejudiced and  purer  mind,  appealed  with 
justice  against  this  confusion  of  the  visi- 
ble and  the  invisible  Church,  to  the  pro- 
mise of  our  Saviour,  that,  "where  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  his  name, 
there  is  he  in  the  midst  of  them :"  Matt, 
xviii.  20 ;  and  they  contended  that  every 
union  of  the  really  faithful,  under  what- 
soever fonn  it  might  be,  was  a  true 
Church.  But  Cyprian  answers  this  objec- 
tion by  saying,  that  Christ  has  at  the  same 
time  set  forth  harmony  among  the  faithful, 
the  unity  of  hearts  in  love,  as  the  condition 
on  which  the  fulfilment  of  this  promise 
rests.  He,  therefore,  concludes,"  How  can 
such  a  one  be  in  harmony  with  any  one 
when  he  is  not  in  harmony  with  the  body 
of  the  Church  itself,  and  with  the  whole 
host  of  the  brethren  }  How  can  two  or 
tliree  be  gathered  together  in  the  name 
of  Christ,  if  they  are  severed  Irom  Clirist 
and  Irom  his  Gospel .'"  Taken  by  itself, 
undoubtedly,  the  remark  is  just,  tliat  the 
being  together  in  the  name  of  Christ  in- 
cludes alike  the  communion  of  brotherly 
love  and  the  communion  of  faith.  He 
might  also  justly  say,  that  those  only,  in 
wliom  this  mark  was  present,  could  apply 
this  proniise  to  themselves,  and  he  might 
justly  oppose  the  application  of  it  to  those 


SALVATION    EXCLUSIVELY    IN    THE     CHURCH. 


123 


who,  impelled  by  a  self-seeking  and  an 
unkindly  qjirit,  had  founded  divisions  in 
the  Church.  But  he  was  wrong  also 
here,  because  he  was  confounding  cause 
and  effect;  these  separatists  were  not  ex- 
cluded from  the  fulfilment  of  that  promise, 
because  they  had  departed  from  outward 
communion  with  the  great  body  of  the 
Church;  not  through  this  outward  sepa- 
ration, but  through  the  feeling  from  which 
their  outward  separation  had  proceeded  : 
yes !  through  that  feeling  were  they  ex- 
cluded from  inward  communion  with 
Christ,  and  from  his  kingdom,  even  before 
they  had  outwardly  separated  from  the 
visible  Church.  And,  therefore,  none 
but  the  Judge  who  can  search  the  inward 
heart,  could  decide  whether  such  persons 
were  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  God 
by  their  evil  heart ;  but  that  outward  act 
was  always  a  fallacious  token  to  deter- 
mine that  such  an  evil  heart  existed.  As 
the  visible  Church,  considered  in  itself 
alone,  is  not  the  spotless  Church  of 
saints,  and  always  bears  many  marks  of 
the  old  and  sinful  nature  upon  her,  which 
may  have  led  men  to  mistake  the  charac- 
ter really  belonging  to  her ;  therefore, 
many  may  have  been  actuated  by  inno- 
cent motives,  to  quit  a  Church  in  which 
they  could  not  recognise  the  Church  of 
the  saints.  There  might  be  right  and 
wrong  on  both  sides,  and  misunderstand- 
ings on  both  sides,  and  neither  party  was, 
therefore,  justified  in  judging  the  other, 
and  instantly  to  condemn  on  account  of 
outward  acts,  which  may  have  proceeded 
out  of  very  different  motives. 

As  a  false  principle,  by  means  of  the 
deductions  which  develope  themselves 
from  it,  is  the  source  of  many  errors,  so 
the  error  of  a  necessary  visible  unity  of 
the  Church  led  to  the  erroneous  idea  of 
a  necessary  outward  representation  of  this  I 
unity.  This  notion,  in  its  first  germ  I 
apparently  very  indistinct,  and  of  little 
signification,  became,  as  it  was  further 
unfolded,  full  of  important  consequences. 
Such  a  representation  of  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  men  found  at  first  in  the  re- 
lation of  St.  Peter  to  the  other  apostles, 
a  conclusion  to  which  an  unprejudiced 
consideration  of  history  and  Scripture 
could  not  give  rise.  No  trace  is  there 
found  of  any  pre-eminence  assigned  to 
St.  Peter  over  the  other  aposdes,  and  such 
pre-eminence  would  have  been  contrary 
to  the  brotherly  relation,  in  which  the 
apostles  stood  to  each  other,  and  to  the 
spirit  of  the  economy  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  which  all,  looking  only  to  one 


Guide  and  one  Master,  were  to  serve  each 
other  mutually.  Such  worldly  thoughts 
of  grandeur,  proceeding  from  carnal  pride, 
had,  indeed,  scattered  their  seeds  into  the 
breasts  of  the  apostles,  but  it  was  before 
they  had  been  born  again  of  the  Spirit ; 
but  how  completely  did  their  Divine 
Master  condemn  such  thoughts;  how 
expressly  did  He  show  them  that  they 
should  speak  of  nothing  like  pre-emi- 
nence, but  only  of  a  contest  of  humility, 
of  self-denial,  and  mutual  service.  With 
Him,  none  should  make  himself  the  first, 
but  each  the  least  among  them  all.  Luke 
xxii.  24.  St.  Peter  had  his  own  peculiar 
charisma;  He  who  looks  into  man's  in- 
most lieart,  had  recognised  in  him  from 
the  very  beginning  the  future  rock  of 
faith  :  He  brought  into  the  service  of  the 
holiest  things  the  fiery  disposition  of  St. 
Peter,  and  his  thorough  going  activity, 
qualities  we  must  avow,  which  first  re- 
quired the  influence  of  the  Spirit  from  on 
high  to  change  their  carnal  turn  into  a 
spiritual,  to  purify  and  to  ennoble  them. 
Through  these  means,  Peter  might  be- 
come, in  a  peculiar  degree,  an  instrument 
capable  of  furthering  the  kingdom  of  God ; 
after  becoming,  through  that  purification 
of  his  earthly  fire  of  disposition,  the  rock 
of  faith  and  power,  he  was  to  strengthen 
and  confirm  the  weaker  brethren.  Luke 
xxii.  32.  But,  for  all  this,  he  had  no 
pre-eminence  above  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
tles, the  others  had  again  other  charis- 
mata, by  which  they  would  be  enabled  to 
eflect  what  his  graces  might  be  unfitted 
for.  When  Christ  called  Peter  the  Rock 
on  which  He  would  build  his  Church, 
(Matth.  xvi.  18,)  this  significant  declara- 
tion did  not  refer  to  any  station  among  the 
aposdes,  peculiarly  assigned  to  St.  Peter, 
nor  on  the  person  of  St.  Peter  alone, 
but  on  St.  Peter,  as  the  real  and  lively 
confessor  of  faith  in  Jesus,  as  our  Mes- 
siah, the  Son  of  the  living  God, — that 
faith,  which  is  the  inviolably  firm  founda- 
tion of  a  Church,  against  which  even  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail.  All  who 
have  received  this  lliith  not  merely  in  the 
letter  by  human  teaching,  which  can  never 
give' such  a  faith,  but  in  spirit  and  in 
truth  through  the  inward  revelation  of  the 
heavenly  Father,  therefore  become,  like 
St.  Peter,  rocks  and  pillars  of  the  Church 
of  Christ,  which  all  the  powers  of  hell 
shall  never  conquer.  To  all  such,  in  the 
person  of  St.  Peter,  as  Tertullian  and 
Origen  have  well  remarked,  is  this  word 
of  the  Lord  spoken.  The  same  spiritual 
power  which  Christ  bestows  in  this  place 


124  CATHEDRA   PETRI. 

on  St.  Peter,  He  attributes  in  the  same  |  to  rest  upon  in  individual  passages,  which 
manner  to  the  rest  of  the  apostles  in  other  |  they  dissevered  from  the  historical  and 
i\Iatt.  xviii.  18.  John  xx.  22.  j  logical  context,  and  which  they  made  to 
in"tliie  conversation  which  our  Saviour  i  mean  every  thing,  which  the  mere  words, 


held  with  this  apostle  after  the  resurrec- 
tion, (John  xxi.  15,)  He  certainly  had  no 
intention  of  investing  him  with  any  pre- 
eminence over  the  rest;  but  it  was  by  far 
rallier  his  intention,  to  try  a  mild  reproof 
of  St.  Peter's  former  self-confidence, 
whicli  his  subsequent  conduct  had  con- 
tradicted and  shown  to  be  unfounded,  to 
exhort  him  to  faithfulness  in  his  calling, 
•which  was  no  other  than  that  of  the  rest 
of  the  apostles,  and,  indeed,  of  all 
preachers  of  the  Gospel.  As  before,  St. 
Peter,  hurried  on  by  his  impetuous  tem- 
per, in  rash  self-confidence,  without  rightly 
Avcighing  the  import  of  his  words,  had 
promised,  that  even  if  all  the  rest  should 
yield  to  the  fear  of  man,  yet  he  would 
remain  true  to  his  Lord,  and  willingly  give 
up  his  life  for  him,  (John  xiii.  37.  Matt. 
xxvi.  35,)  our  Lord  here  reminds  him,  in 
words  of  mild  reproof,  but  full  of  love, 
of  this  promise,  which,  because  it  had  not 
proceeded  from  a  spirit  of  humility  had 
come  to  shame :  "  Sayest  thou  still,"  He 
says  to  him,  "  that  thou  lovest  me  more 
than  these  thy  fellow-disciples  ?"  And 
St.  Peter,  now  brought  to  a  knowledge  of 
himself,  and  to  a  spirit  of  humility,  is  in 
a  totally  diflerent  mood,  and  far  from  mea- 
suring himself  with  others,  say.s,  with  a 


taken  by  themselves,  could  possibly  sig- 
nify. So  did  it  here  happen,  that  when 
once  the  idea  of  a  necessary  visible  unity 
of  the  Church  had  been  formed,  an  idea, 
from  which  the  notion  of  a  visible  repre- 
sentation of  this  unity  in  some  definite 
spot  in  the  Church  could  easily  develope 
itself,  this  latter  notion  found  support  and 
foundation  in  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
passages  relating  to  St.  Peter. 

Cyprian  justly  remarks,  in  his  book  on 
the  Unity  of  the  Church,  that  all  the  apos- 
tles had  received  from  Christ  the  same 
dignity  and  power  as  St.  Peter ;  but  yet, 
in  one  place,  thought  he,  Christ  imparts 
this  power  especially  to  St.  Peter;  he 
says  in  particular  of  him,  that  He  will 
build  his  Church  on  him ;  He  commits 
the  care  of  his  sheep  to  him  in  particular, 
to  show  how  the  development  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  priesthood  should  pro- 
ceed from  one  point,  and  to  point  atten- 
tion to  the  unity  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  episcopal  power.  The  apostle  Peter 
is  here  the  representative  of  the  one 
Church,  remaining  steadfast  in  her  unity, 
which  proceeded  from  a  Divine  founda- 
tion, and  of  the  one  episcopal  power,  a 
power  which,  although  it  be  diffused 
among  many  organs,  still  is,  and  remains 


trembling  spirit,  "  Oh!  thou  that  knowest  \  only  one  in  its  origin  and  nature.  And 
the  heart,  thou  knowest  how,  notwith-  [  therefore,  he  who  departs  from  outward 
standing  that  momentary  fall,  my  heart  communion  with  the  one  visible,  catholic 
burns  with  love  to  thee!"  Our  Saviour  I  Church,  tears  himself  away  from  that  re- 
now  points  out  to  him,  how  this  love  must  j  presentation  of  the  unity  of  the  Cliurch, 
show  itself  in  actively  fulfilling  the  duties  which  was  annexed,  by  Divine  appoint- 
of  his  calling,  and  what  proof  of  his  love  i  ment,  to  the  person  of  St.  Peter.  How 
he  must  one  day  be  ready  to  give.  This  |  then  can  any  one  expect  to  remain  a 
love  must  show  itself  in  a  faithful  care  of  i  member  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  while 
the  souls  of  men,  who  are  to  be  brought,  i  he  quits  the  Cathedra  Petri,  on  whom 
by  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel,  to  the  I  the  Church  is  founded.* 


one  true  common  Shepherd,*  who  alone 


But  although  we  should  agree  to  re- 


can  satisfy  all  tlieir  wants.  He  who, !  cognise  the  apostle  Peter  as  the  represen- 
when  his  hour  of  suffering  was  at  hand,  j  tative  of  the  unity  of  the  Church,  it  by  no 
deserted  his  Lord,  was,  through  love  to  I  means  follows  that  a  similar  representative 


Him,  to  receive  the  power  as  a  true  shep- 
herd of  human  souls,  after  the  example 
of  Christ,  to  sacrifice  his  life  in  the  call- 
ing of  a  preaclier  of  the  Gospel. 

History,  and  the  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture, therefore,  never  could  have  given 
rise  to  the  notion  of  an  apostolic  primacy 
of  St.  Peter,  imlcss,  as  often  happens,  men 
had  .sot  out  from  preconceived  ideas,  and 
souglit  and  found  a  foundation  for  them 

*  See  the  parable  in  John  x. 


must  exist  in  all  the  ages  of  the  Church. 
It  follows  still  less,  that  this  representa- 
tive must  necessarily  be   in  connection 


*  One  trace  of  this  method  of  explaining  the 
pxpressions  relating  to  St.  Peter,  is  found  in  Ter- 
tullian,  Pncscript.  Hmret.  c.  xxii.  This  is  a  proof 
of  the  non-Montanistic  spirit  of  that  work,  because, 
on  the  contrary,  in  his  work,  de  Pudicitia,  where 
he  speaks  as  a  Montanist,  he  apphcs  these  pas- 
sages to  tlve  person  of  St.  Peter  only  as  an  "  homo 
spiritali;;,"  and  makes  them  also  applicable  to  all 
who  were  "  spiritales,"  as  well  as  St.  Peter. 


ASSUMPTION    OP    ROMISH    BISHOPS. 


125 


with  the  Romish  Church;  for  although 
the  tradition  that  St.  Peter  visited  tlie 
Church  at  Rome  has  never  been  called  in 
question  on  any  sufficient  grounds,  yet  it 
is  quite  certain  that  he  did  not  found  this 
Church,  and  that  he  had  never  been  in  any 
particular  manner  its  president.  This 
Church  can  as  little  be  called  the  Cathe- 
dra Petri,  as  the  Cathedra  Pauli.  Irenajus 
and  Tertullian  are  aware  that  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul  founded  this  Church  and 
gave  it  a  bishop,  and  that  they  ennobled 
it  by  making  it  the  scene  of  their  martyr- 
dom ;  but  they  were  quite  ignorant  of  any 
pre-eminence  of  the  Romish  Church  over 
other  "  sedes  apostolicae,"  as  the  Cathe- 
dra Petri.  Hence,  as  the  idea  of  the  out- 
ward unity  of  the  Church  might  generate 
that  of  an  outward  representative  of  that 
unity,  so  also  the  conception  of  this  re- 
presentative, in  the  person  of  the  Apostle 
Peter,  might  easily  receive  such  an  appli- 
cation, as  if  such  a  representative  of  the 
outward  unity  of  the  Church  in  one  defi- 
nite spot  in  the  Church,  essentially  be- 
longed to  the  outward  unity  of  the  Church, 
and  to  all  periods.  And  as  most  of  the 
Western  Churches  were  now  accustomed 
to  consider  the  Church  of  Rome  as  their 
mother-Church,  as  the  "ecclesia  apos- 
tolica,"  to  whose  authority  they  specially 
appealed ;  as  they  were  accustomed  to 
call  St.  Peter  the  founder  of  the  Romish 
Church,  and  to  quote  the  tradition  of  that 
Church  as  proceeding  from  him  ;  as  Rome 
was  then  the  seat  of  the  political  unity  of 
dominion ;  it  came  to  pass,  that  men  be- 
came accustomed  to  look  upon  the  Church 
of  Rome  as  the  Cathedra  Petri,  and  to 
transfer  what  Avas  usually  said  of  St. 
Peter,  as  the  representative  of  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  to  this  Cathedra  Petri.  In 
Cyprian  we  find  this  connection  of  ideas 
already  thus  formed.  We  need  not  refer 
to  the  passage  in  the  book  de  Unitate  Ec- 
clesiae,  in  which  the  reading  is  doubtful  ■* 


*  Even  if  the  suspected  words  in  the  following 
passage,  which  are  here  inclosed  in  brackets,  are 
genuine :  "  Qui  ecclesiie  renititur  et  resistit,  [qui 
cathcdram  Petri,  super  quern  fundata  est  ecclesia, 
deserit,]  in  ecclesia  se  esse  confiditi:"  we  have 
no  right  immediately  to  conclude  that  he  was  here 
directly  thinking  of  the  cathedra  Petri  in  the 
Church  of  Rome,  as  existing  in  his  time,  but  ac- 
cording to  the  context,  the  clauses,  "  ecclesis  re- 
niti,"  and  "  cathedram  Petri  deserere,"  would  be  by 
far  better  taken  in  apposition,  so  as  to  make  him 
say,  "  He  who  breaks  loose  from  the  one  Church, 
invades  and  injures  the  representation  of  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  bound  up  in  the  person  of  St.  Peter 
by  Christ  himself.  The  whole  apostolical  and 
episcopal  power  and  might,  although  it  b  set  forth 


in  a  passage  beyond  all  controversy,  (Ep. 
Iv.  ad  Cornel.  Ep.  lix.  ed.  Ox.,)  he  calls 
the  Church  of  Rome  "  Petri  cathedra,  ec- 
clesia principalis,  unde  unitas  sacerdotalis 
exorta  est." 

It  must  be  confessed  that  this  idea  was 
at  first  very  confused  and  indefinite,  but 
after  the  false  principle  had  once  been  ad- 
mitted and  firmly  rooted,  it  might  be  just 
so  much  the  more  introduced  into  such 
an  indefinite  representation,  and  unfold 
itself  the  better  therefrom.  This  idea  ap- 
pears early  to  have  obtained  a  firm  and 
definite  form  in  the  minds  of  the  bishops 
of  Rome,  and  Roman  ambition  also  ap- 
pears early  to  have  mingled  itself  with 
ecclesiastical  matters,  and  to  have  come 
forward  in  a  spiritual  garb. 

We  observe  that  already,  in  early  times, 
there  were  traces  in  the  Romish  bishops 
of  an  assumption,  that  a  peculiarly  deci- 
sive authority  was  due  to  them,  as  the 
successors  of  St.  Peter,  in  Church  contro- 
versies, and  that  the  "  cathedra  Petri"  was 
to  have  a  prevailing  sway  before  all  other 
"  ecclesise  apostolicae,"  as  the  source  of 
apostolical  tradition.  The  Romish  bishop 
Victor,  gave  a  specimen  of  this  assump- 
tion, when  he  excommunicated  the 
Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  about  A.  D.  190, 
in  consequence  of  a  trifling  dispute  about 
a  mere  external  point.*  In  the  Montanis- 
tic  writings  of  Tertullian,  we  find  that 
the  Romish  bishops  had  already  issued 
peremptory  edicts  in  ecclesiastical  matters, 
and  wished  to  make  themselves  considered 
as  "episcopi  episcoporum,"!  and  that 
they  were  in  the  habit  of  appealing  to  the 
authority  of  their  "antecessores."| 

The  Romish  bishop  Stephanus,  allowed 
himself,  after  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  to  be  carried  away  by  the  same 
spirit  of  hierarchial  encroachment  as  his 
predecessor  Victor,  and  in  a  controversy 
of  no  importance,§  he  also  was  desirous 


in  many  different  organs,  is  represented  as  one,  in 
the  spiritual  power  given  by  our  Lord  to  St.  Peter. 
To  renounce  obedience  to  the  whole  cpiscopatus, 
or  the  cathedra  of  all  the  bishops,  considered  as  one 
whole — the  Cathedra  Petri — is  here  the  meaning  of 
the  phrase  to  assault  or  invade  the  Cathedra  Petri. 

*  A  controversy  about  the  time  of  celebrating 
Easter,  which  we  shall  have  to  mention  in  its  pro- 
per place. 

f  Tertullian,  do  Pedicitia,  c.  1.  "Audio,  edic- 
tum  esse  propositum  et  quidem  peremptorium ; 
pontifex  scilicet  maximus,  quod  est  episcopus  epis- 
coporum,  edicit." 

+  Tertull.  de  Virgg.  Velandis. 

§  The  controversy,  which  we  shall  also  have  to 
treat  of  in  another  place,  about  the  validity  of  bap- 
tism administered  by  heretics. 
L   2 


126 


Cyprian's  declarations  and  the  Spanish  bishops. 


of  imposing  the  tradition  of  the  Romish 
Churrh  as  an  invariable  and  decisive  rule 
for  all  other  Churches;  and  he  excom- 
municated the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor 
and  Africa,  which  would  not  submit  to 
this  rule.* 

But  it  was  far  from  being  the  case,  that 
these  assumptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
had  penetrated  the  whole  body  of  Chris- 
tians :  in  the  first  mentioned  controversy, 
the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  without  be- 
ing led  into  even  a  momentary  error  by  the 
high  language  of  a  Victor,  declared  their 
principles,  and  they  opposed  the  tradition 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  by  those  of  their 
"  sedes  apostolicse."  Irenasus,  the  bishop 
of  Lyons,  in  a  letter  to  the  Romish  bishop 
Victor,  expressly  blames  his  unchristian 
arrogance,  although  in  the  thing  itself, 
■which  was  the  point  in  dispute,  he  agreed 
with  hini.  He  disapproved  of  the  attempt 
of  Victor  to  impose  one  form  of  churchly 
life  upon  all  Churches ;  he  declared  that 
nothing  was  needed  but  agreement  in  faith 
and  love,  and  that  this,  so  far  from  being 
injured  by  differences  in  outward  things, 
■would  only  shine  forth  more  clearly 
through  these  very  differences,  and  he 
recognised  the  right  of  all  Churches  freely 
and  independently  to  follow  their  ancient 
customs  in  such  matters.  Although 
Cyprian,  as  we  have  remarked  above,  con- 
sidered the  Romish  Church  as  really  the 
"  cathedra  Petri,"  and  the  representation 
of  this  outward  unity  of  the  Church,  he 
was,  nevertheless,  far  from  deducing  from 
these  grounds  that  a  right  of  decision,  in 
controverted  Church  matters,  belonged  to 
this  Church.  On  the  contrary,  he  firmly 
and  powerfully  maintained  the  indepen- 
dence of  individual  bishops  in  the  admin- 
istration of  their  Churches  after  their  own 
principles,  and  he  carried  through  what  he 
acknowledged  as  right,  even  against  the 
opposition  of  the  Romish  Church.  In  the 
beginning  of  the  second  of  those  contro- 
versies to  which  we  have  alluded,  when 
he  communicated  the  principles  of  the 
North  African  Church,  which  he  well 
knew  were  at  variance  with  the  usage  of 
the  Romish,  to  Stephanus,  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  he  wrote  to  him  in  the  name  of  a 
synod,  as  a  college,  which  considered 
itself  quite  equal  in  dignity  and  rights, 
would  do  to  another ;  and  he  said,  "  We 
have  communicated  these  things  to  you, 
dearest  brotlier,  in  virtue  of  our  common 
dignity  and  in  sincere  love,  for  we  trust 


•  Kihil  iiinovclur,  nisi  quod  tradituin  est.  He 
gave  out,  "so  succfissioncm  cathedram  Petri  ha- 
bere."    Cypr.  Ep.  Ixxiv.  Ixxv. 


j  that,  out  of  your  own  religion  and  faith, 
those  things  will  be  well  pleasing  to  you 
which  are  agreeable  to  religion  and  truth. 
We  are,  however,  aware  that  some  men 
are  unwilling  to  lay  aside  what  they  have 
once  taken  up,  and  are  unwilling  to  change 
their  principles,  but  that  they  retain  some 
peculiarities  of  their  own,  without  break- 
ing the  bond  of  peace  and  concord  which 
binds  them  to  their  colleagues.  In  such 
matters  we  put  no  restraint  on  any  man, 
nor  do  we  lay  down  any  law,  since  every 
president  of  a  Church  has  tlie  use  of  his 
freewill  in  the  administration  of  his 
Church,  for  which  he  will  hereafter  have 
to  give  an  account  only  to  the  Lord."* 

After  the  violent  declarations  of  the 
Romish  bishop  had  been  delivered,  he 
proclaim'ed  the  same  principle  before  an 
assembly  of  more  than  eighty  bishops  of 
Northern  Africa,  when  he  required  of  each 
of  them  to  give  his  sentiments  freely,  for 
no  one  should  make  himself  a  bishop  over 
the  bishops.  When  Stephanus  appealed 
to  the  authority  of  the  ancient  Romish 
tradition,  and  s])oke  against  innovations  ; 
Cyprian  said  in  reply,t  that  it  was  far 
rather  Stephanus,  who  made  innovations, 
and  fell  away  from  the  unity  of  the  Church. 
"  Whence,  then,  is  that  tradition  ?  Is  it 
deduced  from  the  words  of  the  Lord,  and 
from  the  authority  of  the  Gospels,  or  from 
the  doctrine  and  the  epistles  of  the  apos- 
tles ?  Custom,  which  has  crept  in  with 
some  people,  must  not  prevent  truth  from 
prevailing  and  triumphing,  for  custom 
without  truth  is  nothing  but  inveterate  [or 
antiquated]  error."  He  very  properly 
remarks,  that  it  is  by  no  means  beneath 
the  dignity  of  the  Romish  bishop,  any 
more  than  of  any  other,  to  allow  himself 
to  be  set  right  where  he  has  gone  wrong. 
"  For  the  bishop  must  not  only  teach^  but 
also  ham,  for  he  surely  teaches  best,  who 
is  daily  learning  something,  and  advancing 
by  learning  what  is  best."  Firmilianus, 
the  bishop  of  Cssarea,  in  Cappadocia,  in 
testifying  his  agreement  with  Cyprian, 
(Ep.  Ixxv.)  expressed  himself  also  very 
strongly  against  the  unchristian  conduct 
of  Stephanus,  when  this  latter  forbade  the 
Romish  Church  to  receive  the  deputies  of 
the  North  African  Synod  into  their  houses. 
He  accuses  him,  while  he  boasts  of  being 


*  Pro  communi  honorc  et  pro  simplici.  dilec- 

tionc Qua  in  re  ncc  nos 

vim  cuiquam  facimus  aut  legem  damus,  quando 
habeat  in  ecclcia;  administratione  voluntatis  sua;  ar- 
bitrium  liberum  unusquiffique  pra^positus,  rationem 
actus  sui  Domino  redditurus.    Cyprian.  Ep.  bcxii. 

■f  Ep,  Ixxiv.  ad  Pompej. 


MIXTURE  OF  GENUINE  AND  FALSE  CHRISTIANS. 


12T 


the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  on  whom  the 
unity  of  the  Church  was  built,  of  destroy- 
ing the  unity  of  the  Church,  by  his  un- 
charitable and  ambitious  conduct.  He 
opposes  the  tradition  of  other  old  Churches 
as  well  as  dogmatical  arguments,  to  the 
tradition  of  the  Romish  Cliurch,  which 
had  been  brought  forward,  and  in  order 
to  show  that  the  Romans  did  not  observe 
the  apostolical  traditions  in  all  things,  he 
observes  that,  in  many  Church  matters, 
they  departed  from  the  customs  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  and  other  old  apos- 
tolical Churches,  but  that  men  had  not 
thought  it  worth  while  to  disturb  the  unity 
and  the  peace  of  the  Catholic  Church  on 
account  of  these  differences.* 

Cyprian  had  already  shown,  on  a  for- 
mer occasion  of  a  different  kind,  how  far 
he  was  from  attributing  a  supreme  au- 
thority in  the  Church  to  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  and  from  supporting  him  in  the 
exercise  of  it.  Two  Spanish  bishops, 
Basilides  and  Martialis,  had  been  deposed 
from  their  office  by  the  synod,  as  libella- 
ticif  and  on  account  of  other  faults,  and 
they  had  themselves  acknowledged  the 
validity  of  the  sentence.  The  provincial 
bishops,  having  convoked  the  Church 
over  which  Basilides  had  presided,  had 
already  chosen  another  in  his  place.  But 
the  two  deposed  bishops  went  to  Stepha- 
nus,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  he,  assum- 
ing to  himself  the  authority  of  a  superior 
court,  reversed  the  sentence  of  the  Spa- 
nish Church,  and  replaced  both  of  them  in 
their  office;  whether  it  was  that  he  found 
the  grounds  of  justification,  which  they 
alleged,  satisfactory,  or  whether  it  was 
the  custom  at  that  time  in  the  Romish 
Church,  to  take  the  part  of  those  who 
appealed  to  it.  A  contest  now  arose  in 
Spain,  whether  the  first  sentence  or  the 
reversal  should  be  valid,  and  an  appeal 
was  made  to  the  North  African  Church, 
to  ascertain  their  sentiments.  The  North 
African  synod,  at  Carthage,  in  whose  name 
Cyprian  answered,  had  no  hesitation  in 
declaring  the  sentence  of  the  Romish 
bishop  invalid,  and  they  strongly  charged 
the  Spanish  synod  not  to  continue  the 
two  unworthy  bishops  in  their  offices. 
Cyprian  did  not  enter  into  the  question 
whether  the  Romish  bishop  had  any  riglit 
to  make  any  such  a  judicial  inquiry,  but 
he  declared  without  any  further  discus- 
sion that  this  unjust  sentence,  founded  on 


*  Eos  autem  qui  Romre  sunt,  non  ea  in  omni- 
bus observaie,  qua;  sunt  ali  orignic  tradita,  ctfrus- 
tra  apostolorum  auctoritatcm  prsctendcre. 


insufficient  grounds,  was  void.  In  Ep. 
Ixviii.,  (Ep.  Ixvii.  ed.  Ox.,)  he  writes  thus  : 
"  The  regular  ordination  (of  the  .successor 
of  Basilides)  cannot  be  rendered  invalid, 
on  the  ground  that  Basilides,  after  the 
discovery  and  the  avowal  of  his  fault, 
went  to  Rome  and  deceived  our  colleague 
Stephanus,  who  lives  at  a  distance,  and 
is  unacquainted  with  the  true  circum- 
stances of  the  case,  so  that  he,  who  had 
been  deposed  by  a  just  sentence,  was  able 
to  obtain  an  unjust  sentence  to  reinstate 
him."  Perhaps  the  mortified  hierarchical 
ambition  of  Stephanus,  in  this  event,  al- 
though Cyprian  spoke  of  him  as  yet  with 
great  tenderness,  may  have  had  some  influ- 
ence in  exciting  him  to  the  stubborn  part 
which  he  took  in  (he  second  controversy, 
which  we  have  just  been  mentioning. 

II.  Church  Discipline. — Excommunication 
from  the  visible  Church,  and  re- admission 
into  it. 

The  Divine  Founder  of  the  Church, 
whose  penetrating  glance  could  trace  its 
progress  through  the  succession  of  ages, 
by  the  significant  parable  in  which  He 
represented  its  condition,  (Matt,  xiii.)  had 
proclaimed,  that  it  would  consist,  accord- 
ing to  its  earthly  composition,  of  a  mix- 
ture of  true  and  false  members,  of  such 
as,  although  united  by  the  outward  bond 
of  the  Church,  were  separated  from  one 
another  by  their  inward  dispositions,  and 
in  part  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  God, 
in  part  to  the  ungodly  world.  He  had 
before  declared  that  this  mixture  should 
endure  to  the  end  of  earthly  things,  and 
He  reserved  the  public  sifting  and  sepa- 
ration of  this  mass  of  men,  so  different  in 
their  dispositions  from  each  other,  to  his 
final  judgment  alone.  He  had  blamed 
that  hasty  and  intemperate  zeal  of  man, 
which,  while  it  would  separate  the  tares 
and  the  good  seed  before  the  proper  sea- 
son comes,  is  apt  to  pull  up  the  hidden 
seed  of  the  wheat  with  the  tares,  for  much 
which  is  but  weeds  at  first,  may  become 
changed  to  good  fruit  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Church.  Many  who  at  first  had  been 
members  only  of  this  visible  Church, 
being  gradually  attracted  by  its  influence 
from  outward  to  inward  things,  might  be 
formed  into  members  of  the  invisible 
Church ;  and  the  outward  Church  may 
and  ought  in  this  manner  to  be  not  only 
the  revealer  and  representation  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  which  she  is  constantly 
for  her  genuine  members,  but  also  an  in- 
structress to  educate  man  for  the  kingdom 
of  God.    Now  no  human  eye  is  in  a  con- 


128 


CHURCH    DISCIPLINE. 


dition  to  effect  such  a  separation  in  real 
tnuh  ;  every  human  eye  may  be  deceived 
by  appearances,  to  which  the  inward 
thoughts  do  not  correspond.  But  accord- 
ing to  our  Lord's  expression,  (Matt,  vii.) 
tlie  good  and  the  evil  tree  are  necessarily 
distinguished  by  their  fruits,  but  the  iii- 
ward  condition  of  this  fruit,  the  disposi- 
tion from  which  the  works  proceed,  and 
on  which,  as  far  as  the  moral  worth  of 
actions  is  concerned,  every  thing  depends, 
often  cannot  be  inquired  into  by  a  mere 
human  judgment.  All  evil  does  not  show 
itself  by  gross  outbreaks  of  passions  and 
desires,  so  as  to  strike  the  eye,  and  much 
may  appear  to  be  done  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  with  Cliristian  intentions,  to  the 
honour  of  Christ,  and  seem  to  produce 


great  temporary  resu 


Its   for  the  further- 


ance of  his  kingdom,  which  did  not  truly 
proceed  from  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  is 
not  recognised  by  Him  as  the  work  of 
His  Spirit,  as  He  says,  that  many  will 
appear  to  have  wrought  great  deeds  in 
his  name,  whom  He  will  not  acknow- 
ledge as  belonging  to  him.  Matt.  vii.  22. 
Nevertheless,  although  no  human  judg- 
ment can  fully  separate  the  genuine  mem- 
bers of  the  Church  from  those  who  are 
not  so,  yet  even  mere  human  judgment, 
if  it  would  only  have  followed  the  rules 
of  the  Gospel,  might  have  been  in  a  con- 
dition to  recognise  as  really  evil  much 
foreign  matter,  which  had  attached  itself 
to  the  outward  form  of  the  Church,  and 
showed  itself  in  the  open  outbreaks  of  an 
unregenerated  and  ungodly  heart,  and  then 
to  eject  it  from  the  bosom  of  the  visible 
Church.  It  belongs  to  the  natural  rights 
of  every  society,  to  exclude  those  who 
are  untrue  to  its  principles  from  the 
society,  and  hence  this  was  one  of  the 
natural  rights  of  every  Christian  Church. 
In  regard  to  the  exercise  of  this  right,  the 
Christian  Church  had  only  to  follow  the 
e.xample  of  the  Jewish,  for  there  were 
already  in  the  Jewish  synagogues  formulae 
for  the  exclusion  of  those  who  had  de- 
parted from  the  principles  of  true  religion, 
either  in  theory  or  practice,  and  there 
were,  liesides,  regular  gradations  of  this 
exclusion.  3Iany  difficulties  and  disad- 
vantages, which  rendered  the  exercise  of 
this  riglit  more  didlcult  in  aflertimes, 
when  civil  aiul  ecclesiastical  society  had 
become  more  united,  would  perhaps  have 
no  existence  while  the  Church  remained 
one  independent  whole,  entirely  severed 
from  the  heallien  state.  In  order  to  pre- 
serve the  Church  from  the  contagion  of 
heathen  immorality,  to  keep  it  as  pure  as  j 


possible  in  its  inward  parts,  and  to  dis^ 
countenance  the  notion,  that  a  man  might 
be  a  Christian,  and  yet  continue  in  hea- 
thenish habits  of  sin;  the  Churches,  from 
the  beginning,  renounced  all  communion 
with  those  who  had  violated  their  pledges 
to  a  God-devoted  life,  and  their  baptismal 
vow  of  renouncing  the  kingdom  of  evil 
and  all  its  works,  by  any  great  and  noto- 
rious sins,  or  whose  conduct  openly 
showed  that  they  were  strangers  to  the 
practical  influence  of  Christianity,  and 
that  they  had  continued  to  live  like  un- 
converted men,  in  the  service  of  sin,  or 
having  left  it,  had  relapsed  again  into  it. 
These  men  were  to  be  shown,  that  under 
these  circumstances,  they  would  be  neces- 
sardy  excluded,  by  their  conduct,  from 
the  enjoyment  of  the  rights  and  advan- 
tages which  belonged  to  the  Christians. 
By  this  exclusion  of  unworthy  members 
from  the  society  of  Christians,  the  heathen 
would  also  be  deprived  of  an  opportunity 
of  laying  the  crimes  of  individuals,  who 
falsely  called  themselves  Christians,  to 
the  charge  of  religion  itself. 

St.  Paul,  therefore,  declared  the  Chrisr- 
tian  Churches  not  only  justified  in  eject- 
ing from  their  society  those  whose  con- 
duct rendered  them  clearly  unworthy  of 
the  name  of  Christian  brother,  but  abso- 
lutely bound  to  do  so.  1  Cor.  v.  The 
Christians  might  eat  with  all  the  heathen, 
and  live  in  any  sort  of  intercourse  with 
them  ;  but  they  were  to  avoid  entirely  all 
dealings  of  every  kind  with  those  brethren 
who  had  fallen  away  from  their  religion, 
to  show  them,  in  the  most  pointed  man- 
ner, that  they  had  renounced  all  brotherly 
communion  with  them.  Tertullian,  there- 
fore, might  say  to  the  heathen,  "Those 
who  are  no  Christians,  are  improperly 
called  so.  Such  men  take  no  part  in  our 
congregations ;  they  do  not  receive  the 
communion  with  us ;  they  arc  become 
yours  again  through  their  sins ;  for  we 
have  no  intercourse,  even  with  those 
whom  your  cruelty  has  compelled  to 
recant ;  and  we  should  by  far  rather  en- 
dure among  us  those  who  have  departed 
from  the  principles  of  our  faith  by  com- 
pulsion, than  those  who  have  done  so  of 
their  own  accord.  Moreover,  you  have 
no  right  to  call  those  men  Christians  who 
have  never  been  recognised  as  such  by 
the  Christians,  who  are  unable  to  dissem- 
ble themselves."* 

But  the  Church  must  also  prove  an  in- 
structress, she  must  never  give  up  the 


Ad.  Nation,  i,  5. 


PCENITENTES ABSOLUTION. 


129 


hope  of  recovering  those  who  have  fallen 
away  !  By  this  very  exclusion  from  inter- 
course with  the  brethren,  those  persons,  if 
they  had  still  a  single  spark  of  faith  with- 
in them,  if  they  had  ever  received  any 
wholesome  impressions  in  their  hearts, 
ought  to  be  brought  to  a  consciousness 
of  their  guilt,  and  awakened  to  a  fruitful 
repentance.  If  there  be  any  signs,  as  far 
as  man  can  judge,  of  such  a  change  in 
their  life,  then  their  brethren  must  offer 
them  consolation,  and  receive  them  again 
into  tlieir  communion.  This  was  the 
arrangement  of  St.  Paul.  Many  regula- 
tions were  afterwards  gradually  made 
about  the  cases,  in  wliicli  exconununica- 
tion  was  to  take  place,  and  on  the  kind 
of  life  which  the  excommunicated  ought 
to  lead,  when  they  desired  to  be  re-admit- 
ted to  the  communion  of  the  Church ; 
the  proofs  of  repentance  and  penitence 
which  they  ought  to  give  ;  the  length  of 
time  which  they  ought  to  remain  under 
excommunication :  and  all  these  things 
were  arranged  with  due  regard  to  the 
difference  of  the  transgressions,  and  the 
different  conduct  manifested  by  the  offend- 
ers. (Gefallenen.  Lapsi.)  That  class  of 
them  who  had  been  excommunicated  for 
their  oflences,  and  by  penitence,  were 
earning  for  themselves  at  iirst  re-admis- 
sion into  the  Church,  and  admittance  to 
the  communion,  were  called  the  Poeni- 
tentes.  Tertullian  says,  (de  Pcenitentia, 
c.  ix.,)  "that  they  should  express  their 
contrition  by  their  whole  appearance,  and 
with  fasting;"  (which,  in  these  early 
days,  usually  accompanied  the  special 
gathering  up  of  the  heart  for  prayer,) 
"  they  should  pray  to  God  for  the  for- 
giveness of  their  sins,  make  confession  of 
their  sins  before  the  Church,  and  begging 
all  dieir  Christian  brethren  to  pray  in 
their  behalf,  they  should  throw  them- 
selves at  the  feet  of  the  presbyters,  and 
the  known  friends  of  God."*  Origen  (in 
the  third  book  of  his  work  against  Cel- 
sus,  p.  147,1)  writes  thus:  "The  Chris- 
tians mourn  for  those  who  are  carried 
away  by  lust,  or  any  other  passion,  as  if 
they  were  dead ;  and  when  they  have 
given  proofs,  for  a  long  time,  of  their  real 
change  of  sentiments,  they  receive  them 
again  for  catechumens,  just  as  they  would 
receive  men  that  rose  from  the  dead." 
After  their  repentance  had  been  proved 
genuine  for  a  length  of  time,  absolution 
and  re-admission  into   the  Church  was 

*  [This  is  a  loose  translation  of  the  original 
passage.     I  have  followed  the  German.] 
t  [P.  143,  ed.  Spencer.— H.  J.  R.] 
17 


imparted  to  them  by  the  sign  of  peace 
and  blessing,  the  laying  on  of  hands  by 
the  bishop  and  the  clergy. 

The  pastors  of  the  Christian  Church, 
who  were  animated  by  the  spirit  of  vital 
Christianity,  did  not  fail  to  point  to  the 
inward  nature  of  Christian  penitence,  and 
to  represent  those  outward  acts  of  pen- 
ance, as  tokens  of  the  inward  feelings  and 
sensations  of  the  heart.  "  If  a  man  con- 
demns himself,"  says  Tertullian,  (de  Poe- 
nit.  c.  ix.,)  "God  acquits  him;  so  far 
as  thou  sparest  not  thyself,  believe  me, 
God  will  spare  thee."  They  laid  great 
stress  on  the  difference  between  the  abso- 
lution of  the  priests  and  the  Divine  for- 
giveness of  sins,  and  they  declared  that 
absolution  can  only  reach  its  proper  end 
in  regard  to  him  on  whom  it  is  bestowed, 
when  he  is  really  fitted  for  the  forgive- 
ness of  his  sins  by  the  feelings  of  his 
heart,  which  are  open  to  God  alone,  who 
can  look  upon  the  inward  man.  Thus 
Firmilianus,  the  bishop  of  Caesarea  in 
Cappadocia,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  third 
century,  speaks  after  this  manner :  "  The 
bishops  and  presbyters  meet  every  year 
with  us,  in  order  to  take  counsel  together 
on  matters  of  general  interest,  and  to  con- 
sult for  the  spiritual  cure  of  our  fallen 
brethren,  by  means  of  penitence :  not  as 
if  they  received  from  us  the  forgiveness 
of  their  sins,  but  that  they  may  be  brought 
to  a  consciousness  of  their  sins  by  us, 
and  compelled  to  make  a  more  perfect 
satisfaction  to  the  Lord."  (Cyprian,  Ep. 
Ixxv.)  Cyprian  himself  declares,  (Ep.  lii. 
ad  Antonian.  Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.,)  "  We  do 
not  prejudice  God's  jurisdiction  in  this 
matter,  so  that  He  should  not  be  the 
ratifier  of  what  we  determine,  if  He  find 
the  penitence  of  the  sinner  true  and  per- 
fect. But  if  any  man  has  deceived  us  by 
a  counterfeit  repentance,  then  let  God, 
who  is  not  mocked,  and  can  look  upon 
the  heart  of  man,  decide  on  ihat  in  which 
we  are  unable  to  judge,  and  correct  the 
sentence  of  his  servants." 

But  even  here,  in  this  Church  peni- 
tence, there  was,  in  some  degree,  a  mis- 
chievous taint  of  that  confusion  between 
outward  and  inward  which  we  have  above 
remarked ;  of  that  confusion  between  the 
visible  and  the  invisible  Church,  and  of 
that  false  representation  of  a  New  Testa- 
ment priesthood,  analogous  to  that  of  the 
Old.  According  to  the  pure  evangelic 
view  of  this  matter,  it  is  an  exclusion  from 
the  invisible  Cliurch  alone  that  can  pre- 
judice the  salvation  of  the  sinner;  and 
this,  each  man  can  only  bring  down  upon 


130 


INWARD    AND    OUTWARD    CONFUSED. 


himself  by  his  own  dispositions;  and, 
according  'to  this  view,  there  is  only  one 
means  for  him  to  obtain  forgiveness  of 
his  sins,  and  admittance  to  the  communion 
of  the  invisible  Church— that  is,  penitence 
with  faith,  by  which  the  sinner  appro- 
priates to  himself  what  Christ  hath  done 
for  the  salvation  of  mankind.  He  who 
thus  obtains  communion  with  the  Re- 
deemer, is  a  member  of  the  invisible 
Church,  whether  he  be  received  into  any 
visible  Church  or  not.  Every  Christian 
for  himself,  every  Christian,  without  any 
distinction,  for  others,  can  administer  the 
priestly  office,  of  announcing  to  himself 
or  to  his  brother  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
obtained  for  all  mankind,  and  assured  to 
them  by  the  one  eternal  High  Priest. 
This  declaration  can  never  properly  be 
made,  without  the  presupposed  condition 
of  a  genuine  repentance  in  faith.  All 
must  depend  on  this  heartfelt  penitence; 
all  that  is  outward  can  have  no  meaning, 
except  as  a  spontaneous  fruit  of  that  in- 
ward feeling,  as  a  free  declaration  of  that 
feeling,  not  dependent  on  any  thing  ar- 
bitrary whatever.  These  outward  acts 
may  be  different,  according  to  the  differ- 
ence of  men's  hearts,  relations  and  cir- 
cumstances. The  feelings  of  the  heart 
will  not  bear  to  have  it  prescribed,  in 
what  uniform  mode,  and  by  what  outward 
demeanour  of  a  settled  and  prescribed 
character,  they  shall  be  shown  out- 
wardly. 

But  then,  after  that  error  had  once  taken 
deep  root,  men  must  have  attributed  a 
greater  importance  to  excommunication 
from  the  visible  Church,  than  they  ought 
to  do,  when  considered  in  itself,  in  a  pure 
and  evangelical  point  of  view,  because  this 
visible  Church  appeared  to  them  the  only 
means  by  which  they  could  enter  into 
communion  with  tlie  invisible.  This  fun- 
damental error  might  easily  lead  men  to 
confound  the  confession  of  their  sins  be- 
fore the  outward  Church,*  which  is  no 
essential  part  of  true  penitence,  the  humi- 
liation before  an  outward  ('hurch,  before 
a  visible  priesthood,  before  men  and  crea- 
tures, an  liumiliation  which  cannot  be  pre- 
scribed fairly  to  any  man — with  an  inward 
confession  of  sins  before  God,  with  an 


might  easily  induce  men  to  confound  acts 
of  penitence  required  by  an  outward 
Church,  acts  which  no  human  authority 
was  justified  in  exacting  as  part  of  the 
Divine  law,  acts  which  might  be  done  in 
hypocrisy,  and  in  which,  as  an  "  opus 
operatum,"  that  satisfied  the  law,  men 
were  apt  to  forget  inward  penitence ;  it 
might  lead  men,  [  say,  to  confound  these 
acts  with  that  true  inward  penitence  of  the 
heart,  which  is  an  indispensable  condition 
of  forgiveness  of  sins ;  and  to  confound 
likewise  re-admission  into  the  outward 
communion  of  the  Church  with  a  recep- 
tion into  the  inward  communion  of  the 
invisible  Church  ;  and  lastly,  the  priestly 
absolution  with  the  forgi^'eness  of  sins 
tlirough  God.*  Absolution  was,  under 
this  point  of  view,  to  be  a  peculiar  act 
of  the  Judaeo-Christian  priesthood,  which 
every  Christian  was  not  capable  of  per- 
forming, and  it  must  have  been  looked 
upon  as  something  more  than  the  mere 
announcement  of  God's  forgiveness  of  sin, 
which  every  Christian,  as  a  preacher  of 
the  Gospel,  was  competent  to  make  for 
himself  and  others.  The  spiritual  power 
of  the  apostles,  also,  in  this  respect,  would 
be  conceived  transferred  to  the  bishops  by 
means  of  ordination,  and  the  power  of 
binding  and  loosing  committed  to  the 
apostles,  was  appealed  to,  although  this 
promise  of  our  Lord  contained  nothing  to 
justify  such  an  interpretation  of  it.  It  may 
be  imagined  that  these  words  presupposed 
a  gift  bestowed  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  on  the  apostles, — a  gift  of  looking 
into  the  hearts  of  men, — in  virtue  of 
which  they  were  able  to  distinguish,  in 
each  individual  case,  the  dispositions 
which  made  men  fitted  to  receive  the  for- 
giveness of  their  sins,  from  those  which 
excluded  them  from  such  a  mercy ;  and 
therefore,  was  it,  that  theirf  spiritual  sen- 
tence of  condemnation  or  acquittal,  being 
founded  on  an  infallible  knowledge  of 
men's  hearts,  by  which  they  judged,  must 


*  [This  accusation  has  sometimes  been  made 
against  the  Church  of  England  hy  those  who  will 
understand  her  forms  of  absohuion  in  a  sense 
which  by  far  the  greater  part  of  her  writers  utterly 
disclaim,  and  a  sense  which  in  the  form  most  as- 
spiled  (the  form  in  the  visitation  of  the  sick)  is 
I  .,.  ,,  ,  .,.  .-  I  f  ^  f^  \  ,.,;,i.„,.f  quite  incompatible  with  the  prayer  which  imme- 
heartfelt  humiliation  before  God,  witiiout   J;^^^,^  ^^j,  J^  .^     g^^^  ^^^^^'^  ^,^„^,  ^i.represcn- 


/hich  there  can  be  no  true  penitence ;  it 


♦  As  in  the  following  words  of  the  confessors, 
in  a  letter  to  Cyprian,  Ep.  xxvi.  (Ep.  xxxi.  cd. 
Ox.,)  where  they  bring  forward,  as  a  mark  of  true 
{(cnitence,  the  "  huniilitas  atque  Pubjectio,  qua; 
alienum  de  se  expcctat  judicium,  alienam  dc  suo 
•UBlinet  sentcntiam." 


tations  on  this  subject  arc  noticed  in  an  article  in 
the  number  of  the  British  Critic  for  July,  1831,  on 
Stratten's  Book  of  the  Priesthood.— H.  J.  K.] 

f  ["Ihr  verdammender,  oder  friesprechender, 
,S;eisllichcr  Richtcrspruch."  Germ.  "Gcisllicher" 
is,  perhaps,  here  to  be  taken  in  tho  sense  of  eccle- 
siastical. I  therefore,  quote  tho  original,  that  my 
readers  may  judge. — H.  J.  K.j 


POWER   OP   BINDING   AND   LOOSING. 


necessarily  harmonise  with  the  judicial 
sentence  of  God,  who  declared  his  judg- 
ment by  tliem,  as  his  organs,  and  it  would, 
therefore,  infallibly  be  ratified  and  rendered 
efficacious.  And  in  this  case  the  Monta- 
nists,  and  in  some  degree,  Origen,*  would 
have  had  a  full  right  to  apply  this  promise, 
but  to  those  only  who  had  the  same  mea- 
sure of  illumination  as  the  apostles.  This 
would  be  a  gift  of  a  nature,  of  which  we 
find  some  examples  certainly  among  the 
apostles,  as  in  the  conduct  of  St.  Peter 
towards  Ananias  and  Sapphira;  but  then 
such  a  gift  could  only  be  required  or  ser- 
viceable for  the  peculiar  calling  of  an 
apostle,  and  we  cannot  conclude  from  any 
passage  in  the  New  Testament,  that  sucli 
a  gift  should  continue  forever  in  the 
Church,  and  least  of  all  that  a  priesthood 
should  be  propagated  in  the  Church  as  the 
possessors  of  such  a  gift.  And  yet,  after 
all,  we  do  not  so  much  as  once  find  that 
even  the  apostles  ascribed  to  themselves 
any  abiding  gift,  by  which  their  judgment 
on  men's  hearts  was  to  be  preserved  in- 
fallible in  every  case. 

If  we  now  compare  particularly  the 
context  of  this  promise,  in  John  xx.  21, 
and  similar  passages,  where  Christ  pro- 
claims the  apostles  his  trust-worthy  or- 
gans in  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel ;  we 
shall  be  led  to  see  nothing  in  the  power 
of  the  keys,  as  regards  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  than  the  power  which  lies  of  it- 
self in  the  power  of  preaching  the  Gospel, 
the  power  of  proclaiming  remission  of  I 
sins  and  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  j 

*  Origen,  who  had  experienced  in  his  own  per- 
son the  prejudicial  effects  of  the  ecclesiastical 
power  of  judgment,  assumed  by  the  bishops,  con- ' 
tends  against  it,  (T.  xii.  Matth.)  and  says,  that 
this  power,  committed  to  St.  Peter,  could  only  be 
conceded  to  those  who  partook  with  St.  Peter  of 
all  the  "  predicates"  contained  in  that  passage, 
who  alone  enlightened  like  him  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  could  pass  an  infallible  sentence,  through 
which  God  himself  would  judge.  "But  as  for  those 
who,  in  order  to  make  themselves  of  consequence  as 
bishops,  made  use  of  this  passage  and  applied  it  to 
themselves,  as  to  St.  Peter,  as  if  they  had  them- 
selves received  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
from  our  Saviour ;  they  must  be  told  that  they  are 
quite  right,  iftheij  possess  those  tki7ii^s,  on  account 
of  which  this  was  said  to  St.  Peter — Him.  who  is 
not  bound  by  the  chain  of  his  sins,  neither  God 
himself,  nor  he,  that  is  St.  Peter  himself,  can  bind. 
But  if  a  man  be  no  St.  Peter,  and  hath  not  that 
which  is  there  named,  he  misunderstands  the  sen- 
tence of  Scripture  in  his  pride,  and  judges  in  his 
pride  like  Satan."* 

*  [The  passage  from  which  this  is  abridged  oc- 
curs in  Huet's  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  279,  280,  iu  ^  xii. 
on  Matth.— H.  J.  R.] 


131 


heaven  to  believers,  in  as  far  as  they  do 
believe,  and  of  proclaiming  condemnation 
and  exclusion  from  the  kingdom  of  God 
to  the  unbelievers,  in  as  for  as  they  ex- 
clude themselves  by  their  guilty  desires 
and  dispositions  from  the  only  justifying 
and  saving  means,  and  from  the  only 
means  of  admission  into  that  kingdom; 
for  the  Gospel,  by  its  very  nature,  (2  Cor. 
ii.  14,)  is  a  savour  of  life  unto  life,  or  of 
death  unto  death,  just  as  men  make  it  by 
their  own  dispositions.  And  thus  there 
will  be  found  in  that  promise  nothing 
more  than  what  is  competent  to  every 
Christian,  who  preaches  the  pure  Gospel. 
If  men  had  made  clearly  the  distinc- 
tion between  the  visible  and  the  invisible 
Church,  and  declared  clearly,  that  absolu- 
tion is  nothing  else  than  the  announce- 
ment of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  is 
bestowed  by  Christ  under  the  condition 
of  faith  and  repentance,  then  the  contro- 
versy between  the  milder  and  the  stricter 
party,  as  to  penance,  might  have  been 
more  easily  set  at  rest.  All  were  agreed 
on  the  distinction  between  those  sins, 
into  which  all  Christians  might  fall,  in 
consequence  of  the  sinfulness  of  their  na- 
ture which  clings  to  them,  and  those 
which  clearly  show,  that  he  who  com- 
mits them,  is  still  living  in  the  service  of 
sin,  as  a  constant  habit,  and  that  he  is 
none  of  the  redeemed  nor  regenerate,  that 
he  is  no  Christian,  and  is  in  the  land  of 
destruction — in  short,  the  distinction  be- 
tween "  peccata  venialia"  and  "  peccata 
mortalia,"  or  "ad  mortem."  This  dis- 
tinction was  found  in  the  first  Epistle  of 
St.  John ;  besides  the  denial  of  the  faith, 
men  reckoned  as  sins  of  the  second  class 
— deceit,  theft,  incontinence,  adultery,  &c. 
Now  the  principle  of  the  milder  party, 
which  gradually  obtained  the  upper  hand 
was  this  : — the  Church  must  receive  every 
fallen  member  into  whatever  sins  he  may 
have  fallen,  she  must  hope  for  the  for- 
giveness of  the  sins  of  all,  under  the  con- 
dition of  a  sincere  repentance,  and,  at 
least  in  the  hour  of  death,  the  absolution 
and  the  communion  must  be  given  to  all 
such  as  have  shown  true  penitence  up  to 
that  time.  The  other  party  would  never 
consent  to  the  re-admission  into  Church 
communion  of  those  who  had  violated 
their  baptismal  covenant  by  sins  of  this 
latter  kind.  They  said  : — these  men  have 
despised  the  forgiveness  of  sins  which 
Christ  obtained  for  them,  and  which  was 
assured  to  them  in  baptism,  no  decree  of. 
God  is  revealed  in  regard  to  them,  the 
Church  is,  therefore,  in  no  case  justified 


132 

in  proclaiming  to  them  the  forgiveness 
of  their  sins,  and  she  must  leave  them  m 
the  hands  of  God.  The  one  party  would 
not  suffer  anv  limits  to  be  put  to  the  grace 
of  God  towards  repentant  sinners;  the 
oilier  wished  to  uphold  the  holiness  of 
God,  and  feared  that  men  should  make 
their  brethren  secure  and  easy  in  a  sinful 
life,  by  a  false  reliance  on  the  power  of 
the  absolution  of  the  priest. 

III.  The  History  of  Divisions  in  the  Church, 
or  Schisms. 

The  schismata,  or  what  in  stricter  lan- 
guage are  called  divisions  of  the  Church, 
mus't  be  carefully  distinguished  from  what 
are  properly  called  heresies.  The  former 
are  such  separations  from  the  prevailing 
Church,  as  arise  from  certain  outward 
occasions  and  circumstances,  which  re- 
late to  the  constitution  and  discipline  of 
the  Church ;  the  latter  are  such  separa^ 


CHURCH    DIVISIONS. 


The  former  had  its  source,  remote  in- 
deed, but  lying  deep,  in  the  circumstances 
which  accompanied  the  election  of  Cy- 
prian to  the  bishopric  of  Carthage :  this 
person  had  been  chosen  by  the  voice  of 
the  Church  ;  but  a  part  of  the  clergy,  from 
reasons  with  which  we  are  unacquainted, 
and  on  which  we  can,  therefore,  pass  no 
judgment,  were  discontented  with  this 
choice,  (perhaps,  because  some  one  or 
other  of  the  opponents  of  Cyprian  had 
promised  himself  the  episcopal  office,) 
and  the  chief  persons  at  the  head  of  this 
party  were  five  bresbyters.*  Now  these 
five  presbyters  continued  their  efforts,  to- 
gether with  their  supporters,  to  contend 
against  the  episcopal  authority  of  Cyprian ; 
and  as  the  presbyters  were  still  mindful 
of  their  former  rights,  and  desirous  to 
preserve  their  old  influence  on  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church,  it  was  impossible 
to  avoid  a  contest  between  a  bishop  like 
tions^fVom^Vas^sprin'ff  from  "differences  I  Cyprian,  a  bishop  who  would  act  deci- 


and  controversies  on  points  of  doctrine 
While,  therefore,  what  we  have  to  say  of 
the  latter  is  intimately  connected  with 
the  genetic  development  and  progress  of 
Christianity,  as  far  as  regards  its  doctrines, 
the  representation  of  the  former  is  in  the 
closest  connection  with  the  history  of  the 
constitution  and  discipline  of  the  Church, 
and  both  illustrate  each  other  mutually. 
In  a  dogmatical  point  of  view,  indeed,  the 
history  of  the  Church  divisions  is  only 
important  as  serving  to  illustrate  the  pro- 
gress of  the  doctrine  about  the  Church, 
but  then  the  development  of  this  doctrine 
is  completely  interwoven  with  the  history 
of  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  so  that 
it  seems  the  most  suited  to  our  purpose, 
to  bring  forward  the  history  of  schisms 
in  connection  with  the  chapter  which 
treats  generally  of  the  constitution  of  the 
Church 


In  this  period  we  have  to  record  two  j  warmtli 


dedly  with  strong  views  of  the  highest 
spiritual  power,  which  he  believed  him- 
self to  possess  by  Divine  right,  and  his 
antagonists  in  the  college  of  presbyters. 

It  usually  happens,  where  men,  even 
those  in  whom  a  life  proceeding  from  God 
has  begun,  but  in  whom  the  old  man  is 
not  utterly  destroyed,  contend  for  their 
rights,  instead  of  striving  to  excel  in  the 
execution  of  their  duties  in  the  spirit  of 
charity  and  self-denial,  that  on  both  sides 
prejudice  and  passion  make  them  look  on 
wrong  as  if  it  were  right :  and  this  was 
the  case  here.  But  then,  Ave  are  here 
deprived  of  the  knowledge  of  all  the  cir- 
cumstances necessary  to  enable  us  to  de- 
cide and  separate  right  from  wrong  on 
both  sides,  because  we  have  only  the  par- 
tial account  of  one  side  of  the  question ; 
and  that  too,  an  account  which  bears  upon 
it,  at  times,  plain  marks  of  a  passionate 


remarkable  divisions  in  the  Church,  both 


An  unprejudiced  consideration  will  cer- 


of  which,  as  well  in  regard  to  the  time  m   tainly  not  fail  to  recognise  in  Cyprian  a 


which  they  arose.,  as  to  the  Churches  and 
persons  v/ho  bore  part  in  them,  are  in- 
timately connected  together.  In  the  his- 
tory of  both  these  divisions,  the  monar- 
chical episcopal  system  is  seen  coming 
forth  victorious  from  the  struggle  with 
presbytcrianism :  in  both,  Catholicism 
rises  victorious  over  separatism,  and  both 
divisions  tended  to  the  establishment  of 
the  system  of  the  unity  of  the  Church. 


disciple  of  Christ,  a  man  animated  by  the 

I  spirit  of  love  to  the  Redeemer  and    his 

I  Church.     It  is  not  to   be  denied  that  he 

was  affected  towards  his  flock,  as  a  trua 

pastor  ought  to  be,  that  their  advantage 


*  We  see  this  from  the  words  of  Pontius,  where 
he  speaks  of  the  election  of  Cyf)rian :  "  Quidam. 
ilh  restiteruiit,  etiam  ut  vinceret :"  compared  with 
the  passage  in  Ep.  xl.,  where  he  speaks  of  tlie  ma- 
chinations of  the  five  presbvtcrs  :  "  Conjurationis 
These  divisions  are  those  of  Felicissimus  ! ''"«'  '"''"^^'^''^  ct  antiqua  ilia  contra  episcopatura 
,,,„,-,,       r                             1-         meum,   uno   contra   suflragmm    vcstrum   ct   Uei 
and   of   Novatian,  the   former  pr9ceeduig  L^j.^i^^^       •         .etj^cnte     instaurant  veterem 
/• <i--  /-iL K    -rTVT__»i A  r_: ^,i    •"  .  '  ..      .^        


from  the  Church  of  Northern  Africa,  and 
the  other  from  the  Romish  Church 


contra  noa  impugnationem  suam. 
cd.  Ox.) 


(Ep.  xliii. 


THE    CHARACTER   OF    CYPRIAN. 


Jay  sincerely  at  his  heart,  and  that  he 
wished  to  exercise  his  episcopal  office  so 
as  to  maintain  discipline  and  order  in  his 
Church  ;  but  then,  it  is  also  certain,  that 
he  was  not  enough  upon  his  guard  against 
the  fundamental  evil  of  human  nature, 
which  is  always  ready  to  fix  itself  on 
some  of  the  best  quaUties  in  man,  and  by 
which  these  best  qualities  of  man  may  be 
adulterated  and  corrupted, — an  evil  which 
is  exactly  the  most  dangerous  to  those 
who  are  furnished  with  the  choicest  gifts 
and  powers  for  the  service  of  the  Lord, 
and  is  then  most  dangerous  when  it  takes 
a  spiritual  form ;  it  is  certain  that  he  was 
not  sufficiently  upon  his  guard  against 
pride,  with  all  its  overheated  suggestions. 
That  for  which  he  struggled,  the  full 
power  of  the  episcopacy,  was  exactly  the 
rock  on  which  his  spiritual  life  made  ship- 
wreck ;  in  the  bishop  '■'  appointed  by  God 
himself,  and  acting  in  the  name  of  Christ," 
he  forgot  the  man,  living  in  the  flesh,  and 
exposed  to  all  the  tempatations  to  sin, 
which  others  undergo ;  in  the  bishop 
called  to  govern,  and  gifted  with  inviolable 
authority  from  God,  he  forgot  the  disciple 
of  Christ,  the  tender-hearted  and  humble 
Christ,  appearing  in  the  form  of  a  ser- 
vaiit^for  the  service  of  his  brethren.  Had 
he  always  remained  true  to  tliis  spirit  of 
discipleship  to  Christ  he  would  have  been 
able,  with  more  ease  to  himself,  and  more 
salutary  fruits  to  the  Church,  to  have  con- 
quered his  enemies,  than  by  all  his  insist- 
ing on  the  inalienable  rights  of  episcopacy, 
and  all  his  appeals  to  supernatural  reve- 
lations, visions,  and  dreams,  in  which  it 
might  happen  to  him,  to  confound  the 
self-delusions  of  prejudice  and  pride  with 
the  inspirations  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It 
was,  for  example,  undoubtedly,  a  different 
spirit  which  allowed  him  to  conceive  the 
pretended  heavenly  voice  to  be  a  warning 
to  his  opponents,  when  it  said  :  "  He  who 
believes  not  Christ,  who  appoints  the 
priest,  will  hereafter  be  obliged  to  begin 
to  believe  Christ,  who  avenges  the  priest."* 
Well  might  Cyprian  take  to  heart  the  re- 
proof which  a  layman  who  had  joined 
the  opposite  party,  gave  him,  by  remind- 


*  See  Ep.  Ixix.  ad  Florientum  Pupianum. 
(Ep.  Ixvi.  ed.  Oxon.)  In  these  cases  his  adver- 
saries had  a  right  to  blame  him  for  the  "  somnia 
ridicula  et  visiones  ineptas,"  to  which  he  was  in 
the  habit  of  appealing,  although  every  thing  of 
this  sort  need  not  have  been  the  delusive  reflection 
of  prejudice  and  pride.  There  may  have  been 
gifts  of  grace  present  to  him,  on  which  self-delu- 
sion fixed  itself,  because  they  served  to  nourish 
pride,  instead  of  being  used  with  humility. 


133 

ing  him  that  "Me  priests  ought  to  be  hum- 
ble, for  even  Christ  and  his  apostles  were 
hmnblc.''''* 

These  five  presbyters,  or  at  least  some 
of  them,  were  probably  presidents  of  se- 
parate Churches  in  or  near  Carthage,  and 
had  indulged  themselves,  in  defiance  of  a 
bisliop  whom  they  hated,  in  many  inde- 
pendent proceedings  in  the  management 
of  Church  affairs,  or  at  least  in  such  pro- 
ceedings as  Cyprian,  who  looked  upon 
the  matter  from  the  episcopal  point  of 
view,  might  consider  an  infringement  of 
the  bishop's  rights.  One  of  them,  by 
name  Novatus,  a  rnan,!  it  would  seem,  of 


*  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixix.  (Ep.  Ixvi.  ed.  Oxon.) 
This  layman  was  Florentius  Pupianus,  probably 
a  confessor,  who  joined  himself  to  the  party  of 
Felicissimus.  The  letter  of  Cyprian  to  him  is  not 
calculated  to  contradict  the  accusation  of  a  want 
of  humility.  Pupian  had  declared  that  he  had  a 
scruple  in  his  heart  about  Cyprian,  which  must 
first  be  removed,  before  he  could  acknowledge 
Cyprian  for  his  bishop  in  real  sincerity,  (scrupu- 
lum  sibi  esse  toUendum  de  animo,  in  quern  inci- 
derat.)  Instead  of  applying  himself  to  investigate 
and  remove  what  might  be  a  subject  of  reproach 
to  Cyprian,  in  the  opinion  of  this  layman,  who 
seems  a  well-intentioned  person,  although  led 
astray  by  the  hasty  opponents  of  Cyprian,  this 
letter  appeals  only,  with  episcopal  pride,  to  the 
judgment-seat  of  God,  who  had  appointed  him 
bishop,  and  declaims  against  the  iniquity  of  any 
man  making  himself  a  judge  over  the  priest  called 
to  his  office  by  God  himself. 

f  This  is  all  which  we  feel  justified  in  saying 
of  Novatus  after  an  impartial  investigation,  as  far 
as  we  can  judge  from  the  deficient  and  partial 
documents  we  possess.  The  accusations  which 
Cyprian  himself  brings  against  him,  Ep.  xlix. 
(Ep.  lii.  ed.  Ox.,)  would,  we  confess,  if  they  are 
founded  on  fact,  make  him  appear  in  a  most  un- 
favourable point  of  view ;  but  these  accusations 
bear  completely  the  stamp  of  blind  passion,  which 
without  investigating  the  matter  competently, 
trusts  deceitful  rumours,  and  gives  itself  up  to  a 
most  unjust  mode  of  drawing  conclusions.  The 
usual  mode  of  controversy  was  here  employed : 
to  attribute  bad  motives  to  the  opposite  party,  and 
to  assume  these  as  certain,  just  as  if  man's  in- 
ward heart  had  been  laid  open,  without  giving  a 
single  proof  in  support  of  these  suppositions. 
According  to  this  representation,  Novatus  was 
about  to  be  called  before  an  ecclesiastical  tribunal 
on  account  of  his  offences ;  his  conscience  con- 
demned him,  and  he  was  rejoiced  at  the  outbreak 
of  the  Decian  persecution,  which  stopped  all  pro- 
ceedings against  him,  and  in  order  to  escape  the 
sentence  of  condemnation,  which  awaited  him 
after  this  was  over,  he  set  on  foot  all  those  distur- 
bances of  which  we  shall  have  to  speak  hereafter, 
and  broke  loose  from  the  niling  Church.  How 
well  put  together  are  all  these  accusations,  but 
how  improbable  are  they  !  During  the  Decian 
persecution,  indeed,  Cyprian  himself  acknow- 
ledges Novatus  as  a  proper  presbyter.  Ep.  v.  [I 
believe  the  Letter  here  alluded  to  is  Ep.  vi.  (ed. 
Ox.  xiv.)  in  ed.  Painel.— H.  J.  R.  j 

M 


134 


NOVATUS — ORDINATION    OF    FELICISSIMUS. 


restless  and  enterprising  character,  and  one  |  monarchical  principles  of  Church  govern- 
who  rejected,  with  the  strong  spirit  of  jnient.  Cyprian  allowed  Felicissimus  to 
freedom  that  belongs  to  the  Church,  the   remain  in   his  office,  whether  it  was  out 

of  deference  to  a  strong  party,  or  whether 
it  was  only  afterwards  that  the  hostile 
conduct  of  Felicissimus  induced  him  to 
represent  his  ordination  as  irregular  and 
invalid,  and  a  violation  of  his  episcopal 
rights.  This  anti-Cyprian  party  now 
sought  an  occasion  of  coming  forward 
openly  against  the  bishop,  and  it  was  of- 


voke  of  episcopal  monarchy,  but  one  who 
'irave  way  too  much  to  his  passionate  dis- 
position", being  the  president  of  a  congre- 
gation and  Church  on  a  hill  at,  or  near 
to  Carthage,  had  without  being  first  com- 
missioned by  the  bishop,  ordained  one  of 
his  followers,  by  name  Felicissimus,  to 
be  deacon  of  his  Church.*     This   Feli- 


cissimus was  one  who  was  just  calculated  Ifered  to  them  on  the  breaking  out  of  the 
to  become  an  enterprising  partisan,   and   persecution  of  Decius,  which  took  place 


one  who  would  possess  an  extensive  m- 
iluence  among  the  congregation,  from  his 
personal  connections.  Cyprian  declares 
this  an  infringement  of  his  episcopal 
rights  ;  but  Novatus,  with  his  views,  and 
accorditig  to  his  presbyterian  system, 
might  tliink  himself  qualified,  as  a  pres- 
byter and  president  of  a  Church,  to  per- 
form this.  Which  was  right  and  which 
was  wrong,  was  here  not  so  clearly  made 
out  at  that  time,  when  the  struggle  was 
undecided  between  the  aristocratical  and 


In  order  to  judge  of  the  conduct  of  Novatus  in 
these  controversies,  the  following  is  an  important 
inquiry:  Whether  he  was  one  of  the  five  pres- 
byters who  opposed  Cyprian  from  the  beginning  1 
Moshiem  has  brought  nmch  to  combat  this  suppo- 
sition, and  the  most  weighty  of  his  arguments 
will  be  adduced  below.  We  are  unable  here  to 
decide  with  certainty  upon  this  point;  but  still, 
the  whole  connection  of  the  history  is  in  favour 
of  an  afTirmative  answer.  In  the  Letter  of 
Cyprian,  Ep.  v.,  we  have  just  quoted,  five  presby- 
ters write  to  Cyprian,  in  order  to  make  a  request 
to  him.  One  of  those  here  mentioned,  namely. 
Fortunatus,  belonged  to  the  five  presbyters,  ac- 
cording to  Cypirian's  own  declaration,  Ep.  Iv.  [I 
believe  this  is  Ep.  lix.  ed.  Ox.  v.  p.  131.— H.  J,  R.] 
As  Novatus  was  then  with  Fortunatus,  it  is  highly 
probable  that  all  the  four  presbyters  who  here  ap- 
pear as  one  party,  were  no  others  than  the  old 
opposition  party,  the  five  presbyters,  the  Presby- 
terium  Fclicissimi.  Also,  in  the  answer,  by  anti- 
cipation, which  Cyprian  returns  to  their  request, 
we  may,  perhaps,  discover  a  new  source  of  irrita- 
tion against  the  bishop.  The  comparison  of  what 
Cyprian  says  of  the  machinations  of  Novatus, 
Ep.  xlix.  (Ep.  Hi.  cd.  Ox.,)  with  what  he  says  of 
the  machinations  of  the  five  presbyters,  Ep.  xl. 
(Ep.  xliii.  ed.  Ox.,)  and  also  with  what  Pontius 
says  of  the  old  enemies  of  Cyprian,  will  bespeak 
the  existence  of  only  one  anii-Cyprian  party  from 
the  very  beginning — a  party  which  held  together, 
and  in  which  Novatus  took  a  conspicuous  part. 

*  .Sec  Cyprian,  Ep.  xlix.  (Ep.  hi.  ed.  Ox.,)  on 
Novatus:  "Qui  Felicissimum  satellitein  suum 
(haconum,  nee  permitteiitc  me  nee  sciente  sua 
trtctionc,  et  ambitione,  constituit."  All  this  tends 
to  show,  that  the  naming  Felicissimus  to  a  dea- 
con's ollice,  preceded  the  division  caused  by  No- 
vatus ;  but  in  the  absence  of  more  circumstantial 
accounts  of  the  matter,  there  is  still  considerable 
doubt  on  this  point. 


very  shortly  after  these  events. 

We  have  before  observed,  that  at  the 
beginning  of  this  persecution  Cyprian  had 
withdrawn  himself  for  a  time  from  his 
Church,  but  he  had,  as  we  then  saw,  good 
grounds  to  justify  this  step,  and  the  very 
best  justification  of  it  was  afTorded  by  his 
martyrdom  afterwards ;  but  still  it  was  a 
conduct  on  which,  of  course,  a  difference 
of  opinion  might  exist.  Cyprian's  ene- 
mies were  glad  to  look  upon  the  thing  in 
the  worst  light,  and  accused  him  of  hav- 
ing been  induced  by  cowardice  to  violate 
his  duty  as  a  pastor.* 

We  must  observe,  besides,  that  this 
party  of  adversaries  to  Cyprian  had  many 
opportunities,  from  what  happened  during 
the  persecution  to  increase  their  own 
number,  and  to  instigate  men's  minds 
against  the  bishop.  As  we  have  before 
observed  in  the  history  of  this  persecution 
many  were  driven,  by  fear  or  force  of  the 
torture,  to  conduct  which  was  considered 
as  a  denial  of  the  faith,  and  involved  an 
"  ipso  facto"  excommunication.  But  most 
of  them  were  afterwards  disturbed  by  se- 
vere remorse  for  their  guilt,  and  longed  to 
return  to  the  congregation  of  their  breth- 
ren, and  to  partake  with  them  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.      An  inquiry  now  arose;    shall 


*  We  may  perceive  by  the  manner  in  which 
the  Roman  clergy  spoke  of  this  matter  in  their 
first  Letter  to  the  Church  of  Carthage,  Ep.  ii.  (Ep. 
viii.  ed.  Ox.,)  that  some  person  had  been  able  to 
put  it  in  a  disadvantageous  light  before  them,  and 
that  hence  at  Rome  they  were  not  inclined  entirely 
to  approve  of  the  motives  assigned  by  Cyprian  ;  for 
they  say, "  in  which  he  may  have  done  well"  (quod 
utique  recte  fecerit.)  Cyprian,  in  consequence  of 
this,  expresses  a  suspicion  that  this  Letter,  in 
which  things  so  strange  to  him  appeared,  might  be 
a  counterfeit.  Ep.  iii.  (Ep.  ix.  ed.  Ox.)  After- 
wards, when  he  learnt  that  his  opponents  had  re- 
presented his  conduct  in  an  unfavourable  light  at 
liome,  he  thought  it  necessary  to  justify  himself  by 
a  proper  explanation  of  the  whole  course  of  the 
business,  and  he  writes  thus  to  the  Roman  clergy; 
"Quoniam  comperi,  minus  simpliciter  et  minus 
fideliter  vobis"  renuntiari,  quffi  liic  a  nobis  et  gesta 
sunt  et  geruntur."     Ep.  xiv.     (Ep.  xx.  ed.  Ox.) 


CHANGE  IN  Cyprian's  sentiments. 


1S5 


we  instantly  accede  to  their  wishes,  or 
shall  we  wholly  reject  their  petition  ?  or 
shall  we  devise  a  middle  course,  by  open- 
ing to  them  a  hope  of  re-admission  into 
Church   communion;    but    before    it    be 
granted  in  reality,  try  their  conduct  for  a 
long  season  of  time,  and  demand  contin- 
ued  proofs  of  contrition  at  their  hands  ? 
Shall  w^e  treat  all  these  fallen    brethren 
(lapsi)  in  the  same  manner,  or  shall  we 
act  differently  by  them,  according  to  the 
difference  of  circumstances,  and  the  differ- 
ence of  their  offences  ?     The  Church  was 
at  that  time  without  any  general,  recog- 
nised principles  as  to  Church  penitence  in 
these  respects  ;  there  was  (see  above)  one 
party  which  would  grant  absolution  to  no 
man,  under  any  conditions  whatever,  if  he 
had  once  broken  his  baptismal  covenant 
by  a  mortal  sin,  (as  the  phrase  went.)  and 
among   these  sins   they  reckoned  every 
kind  of  denial  of  the  faith  and  every  re- 
lapse into  heathenism.      Cyprian,*  who 
used  to  consider  Tertullian  as  especially 
his  teacher,  might  perhaps,  from  the  study 
of  his  writings,  have  received  a  bias  to- 
wards the  principles  of  the  stricter  party, 
in  respect  to  penitence.     Many  passages 
in  those  of  his  books  which  were  written 
before  the  Decian  persecution,  lead  us  to 
conclude,  that  he  had  formerly  been  an 
advocate  of  the   principle,  that  no  man, 
who  had  committed  a  mortal  sin,  should 
receive  absolution.     As  for  instance,  when 
he  says,|  ''•These  are  the  words  of  the 
Lord  in  warning  :  '  See  !  thou  art  become 
whole ;  sin  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing 
befall  thee  !'     He  gives   the  rule  of  life 
after  he  has  bestowed  soundness,  and  he 
does  not  allow   men  afterwards   to  run 
about  unbridled  ;  but  rather  as  the  man  is 
bound  to  serve  Him  for  having  been  cured 
by  Hira,  He  threatens  him  the  more  se- 
verely, because  the  guilt  is  less  if  a  man 
sins  before  he  knows  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lord  ;  but  there  is  no  rnore  forgiveness  for 
sins  when  a  man  sins  after  he  has  begun 
to  know  the  Lord.'^''     It  may  be  alleged, 
that  Cyprian  here  only  wished  to  mark 
strongly  the  greater  guilt  of  a  sin  commit- 
ted by  a  Christian^  and  that  this  passage 
is  only  to  be  understood  relatively ;  but 
certainly  more  is  intended  in  one  of' the 
positions  laid  down  in  his  collection  of 


Biblical  Testimonies  :*  "  That  to  those 
who  have  sinned  against  God  no  forgive- 
ness can  be  imparted  by  the  Church."| 
And  from  the  passages'.};  which  are  there 
quoted  from  Scripture,  we  see  that  by  sin 
against  God  he  understood  nothing  but  a 
falling  away  from  Christianity,  which  is  a 
very  unsuitable  description  of  such  trans- 
gressions, as  if  every  sin  were  not  a  sin 
against  God,  and  a  falling  away  from 
God  I  but  Cyprian  judged  more  properly 
in  this  respect  afterwards,  as  we  shall  see 
in  the  course  of  our  history. 

But,  although  Cyprian  was  an  advocate 
of  this  principle,  when  he  first  entered 
upon  his  episcopal  office,  yet  now  the 
great  number  of  the  fallen  brethren,  who 
asked  for  absolution,  and  some  of  them 
with  the  bitterest  tears  of  repentance,  must 
in  some  degree  have  shaken  him  as  a  man 
of  tender  and  fatherly  feelings  towards 
his  Church.  Were  all  these, — some  of 
whom  had  only  sinned  from  want  of 
knoM'ledge,  and  others  had  only  yielded 
to  the  flesh  under  the  severity  of  the  tor- 
ture,— were  all  these  to  remain  forever 
excluded  from  the  blessed  communion  of 
their  brethren  ;  that  is,  according  to  Cy- 
prian's mode  of  view,  from  the  Church, 
in  which  alone  is  the  road  to  heaven  ? 
The  paternal  feelings  of  the  bishop  strug- 
gled against  such  a  resolution ;  but  he 
dared  not  here  to  act  on  his  own  respon- 
sibility. In  this  state  of  indecision,  he 
gave  it  as  his  opinion,  that  they  should 
receive  the  fallen  brethren,  and  exhort 
them  to  penitence ;  but  that  the  decision 
on  their  fate  should  be  postponed  till  the 
time  when,  after  the  restoration  of  tran- 
quillity, the  bishops,  clergy,  and  Churches, 
might  unite  in  some  general  principle  on 
this  matter,  which  so  materially  affected  all 
Christians,  by  means  of  some  general  and 
considerate  deliberation,  after  a  due  exam- 
ination of  the  thing  in  all  its  bearings.  It 
was  also  to  be  remembered,  that  there  was 
a  great  difference  between  the  off"ences 
of  these  fallen  brethren,  some  of  whom 
had  run  to  the  altars  of  the  gods,  without 
making  the  smallest  resistance,  only  to 
avoid  sacrificing  any  thing  earthly,  while 
others  had  only  failed  out  of  pure  ignorance, 


*  According  to  Jerome,  de  V.  I.,  when  he  asked 
for  Tertullian's  books,  he  used  to  say  to  his  sccre- 
letary, "  Da  magistratum." 

•j-  Dc  habitu  Virginum. 

\  Nulla  venia  ultra  delinquere,  postquam  Deum 
nosse  cccpisti. 


*  De  Testimoniis,  lib.  iii.  c.  28. 

f  Non  posse  in  ecclesia  remitti  ei,  qui  in  Deum 
dehquit. 

\  The  same  passages  which  Cyprian  introduces 
in  the  epistle  to  the  clergy  of  Carthage,  Ep.  ix. 
(Ep.  xvi.  cd.  Ox.,)  on  the  subject  of  denial  of  the 
faith  under  j)er.socution.  So  also  in  Ep.  xi.  (Ep. 
xvii.  cd.  Ox.,)  we  find  the  contrast:  "  Minora  de- 
licta,  quse  non  in  Deum  comurituntur." 


THE    LAPSI    SUSTAINED. 


136 

or  by  the  weakness  of  the  conquered  flesh ; 
and  the  unquiet  of  the  times  ot  persecu- 
tion prechided  any  accurate  discrimina- 
tion between  the  offences  and  the  moral 
state  of  individuals,— and  yet  to  a  proper 
judgment  on  the  part  of  the  clergy,  re- 
gard must  be  had  to  these  points  particu- 
larly. And  then,  too,  the  fallen  brethren 
themselves  vvere  to  make  themselves 
worthy  of  re-admission  into  Church  com- 
munion, by  active  proofs  of  repentance 
which  the  persecution  itself  gave  them  the 
best  means  of  doing.  "  He  who  cannot 
bear  delay,"  says  Cyprian,  "may  obtain 
for  himself  the  martyr's  crown."  Under 
these  impressions  it  was  that  he  acted,  in 
comforting  all  the  fallen  brethren,  who 
desired  absolution,  by  directing  their 
thoughts  to  the  end  of  the  persecution, 
when  their  circumstances  should  be  in- 
quired into.  But  some  of  the  clergy,  and 
as  Cyprian  afterwards  learned,  his  old  ad- 
versaries, took  up  these  men,  strengthened 
them  in  their  demands,  instead  of  exhort- 
ing them  to  submit  quietly  to  the  bishop's 
decision,  and  made  use  of  this  opportu- 
nity to  excite  the  schism  in  the  Church 
which  they  were  anxious  to  see. 

If  these  fallen  brethren  had  only  been 
supported  in  their  impetuous  demands  by 
the  presbyters  opposed  to  Cyprian,  with- 
out finding  any  other  support,  their  op- 
position against  the  bishop's  measures 
would  have  had  less  weight.  They  found 
means,  however,  to  win  over  to  their 
cause  a  voice  which  then  had  very  great 
influence  among  the  Christians,  the  voice 
of  those  "  Witnesses  of  the  Faith,"  who 
had  made  confession  of  their  faith  under 
torture,  or  who  went  to  meet  a  martyr's 
death  after  making  confession.  It  was 
altogether  in  the  character  and  spirit  of 
Christian  martyrs,  to  make  their  last  legacy 
a  legacy  of  love,  to  speak  with  their 
latest  breath  rcords  of  love  to  their  breth- 
ren ;  it  was  quite  consonant  to  their  spirit, 
that  those  who  were  about  to  enter  into 
glory  after  a  firm  and  victorious  struggle, 
should  show  a  sympathy  with  their 
weaker  brethren,  who  had  yielded  in  the 
fight;  and,  lastly,  should  commend  these 
fallen  brethren  to  the  benevolent  accept- 
ance of  the  Church.  And  it  was  just 
also,  that  the  word  of  these  witnesses  of 
the  faith  slmnld  be  held  in  especial  esteem, 
if  men  would  only  remember,  that  they 
also  were  sinful  men,  needing,  like  all 
others,  the  forgiveness  of  their  own  sins, 
and  that  they,  as  long  as  they  were  in 
the  flesh,  had  slill  to  struggle  constantly 
with   the  flesh ;   and  if  these  witnesses 


would  themselves  also  remember  this; 
and  if  they  would  avoid  being  blinded  by 
the  excessive  honour  paid  to  them,  and 
so  being  given  up  still  more  to  the  power 
of  the  hidden  enemy,  against  whom  they 
had  still  to  fight  as  sinful  men,  and  if 
they  would  take  care  not  to  use  the  mo- 
mentary victory,  which  they  had  won 
through  the  grace  of  God,  to  the  nourish- 
ment of  a  spiritual  pride.  Many  yielded 
to  this  temptation;  they  granted  the  peace 
of  the  Church,  to  those  who  asked  it  of 
them,  in  an  imperative  manner,  and  acted 
as  if  there  needed  nothing  but  their  voice 
for  the  absolution  of  the  fallen  brethren. 
The  clergy,  who  ought  to  have  set  them 
right,  in  consequence  of  Cyprian's  exhor- 
tation, and  to  have  led  them  to  humility, 
only  strengthened  them  still  more  in  their 
notions,  and  used  them  as  instruments  to 
further  their  own  machinations  against 
the  bishop.  They  put  the  bishop  very 
often  in  no  small  embarrassment  by  their 
imperative,  and  often  very  indefinitely 
expressed,  declarations.  Such,  for  exam- 
ple, was  the  following  :  "Let  this  or  that 
person  be  received  into  Church  commu- 
nion, together  with  those  that  belong  to 
him  :"*  an  expression  which  allows  of 
such  various  and  indefinite  explanations 
and  applications!  Those  who  applied 
these  indefinite  expressions  to  themselves 
were  very  proud  in  the  notion,  that  the 
j  confessors  or  the  martyrs  had  given  them 
absolution,  and  they  would  hear  of  no 
I  delay,  and  suffer  no  trial  of  their  conduct 
!  to  take  place.  The  less  they  showed 
i  proper  contrition  and  humility,  the  less 
Cyprian  was  inclined  to  accede  to  their 
impetuous  demands,  and  hence  he  was 
easily  held  up  to  odium  as  an  enemy  to 
the  honour  due  to  the  heroes  of  the  faith. 
He  was  fulfilling  his  duty  as  a  pastor, 
when  he  powerfully  and  firmly  opposed 
the  exaggerated  reverence  paid  to   those 


*  "  Communicet  ille  cum  suis."  According  to 
Cyprian,  Ep.  xiv.  (Ep.  xx.  ed.  Ox.,)  thousands  of 
these  "  liBelli  pacis"  were  set  forth  every  day  by 
the  confessors  without  examination.  In  the  end 
of  the  second  century,  TertuUian  speaks  of  this 
custom  as  of  an  ancient  one.  "  Pacem  in  ecclesia 
non  habentes,  a  mattyribus  in  carcere  exoiare  con- 
sueverunt."  Ad.  Martyr,  c.  i.  As  a  Montanlst, 
he  speaks  violently  against  the  misuse  which  took 
place  in  this  matter,  and  he  hints  that  many  were 
confirmed  in  their  sins,  by  means  of  the  "  libelli 
pacis"  granted  to  them  inconsiderately  by  the  con- 
fessors. De  Pudicitia,  c.  xxii.  The  Council  of 
Elvira  expresses  itself  thus  against  the  abuses, 
which  were  caused  by  these  letters  of  recommen- 
dation of  the  confessors,  whether  real  or  counter- 
feit; "  quod'  omnes  sub  hac  nominis  gloria  passim 
concutiunt  simplices."     Can.  xxv. 


HONOURING   THE    MARTYRS. 


137 


witnesses  of  the  faith,  (which  was  likely 
to  become  the  source  of  much  supersti- 
tion,) as  well  as  the  false  confidence  on 
their  decision,  which  seduced  men  into 
security  while  in  a  life  of  sin.  He  pointed 
out  to  the  confessors,  that  a  true  confes- 
sion cannot  be  an  "  opus  operatum,"  but 
that  it  muse  consist  in  the  whole  course 
of  tlieir  conduct.  [Ep.  xiii  ed.  Ox.] 
''•The  tongue  which  has  confessed  Christ 
must  be  maintained  pure  and  undefiled  in 
its  dignity  ;  for  he  who  speaks  that  which 
conduces  to  peace,  that  which  is  good  and 
right,  according  to  the  command  of  the 
Lord,  confesses  Christ  daily."  When  he 
warns  them  against  false  security  and 
against  pride,  he  writes  thus  to  them. 
(Ep.  vi.)  "Ye  must  lay  it  much  to 
heart  that  what  ye  have  happily  begun, 
may  be  perfected  in  you.  It  is  but  little 
to  be  able  to  ohtain  some  advantage^  it  is 
more  to  keejj  what  one  has  gained.  The 
Lord  taught  us  this,  when  He  said  :  'See! 
thou  art  now  whole !  henceforth  sin  no 
more,  lest  a  worse  thing  befall  thee."  So 
also  think  thou,  that  He  says  to  a  confes- 
sor :  'See!  thou  hast  become  a  confessor! 
sin  no  more,  lest  a  worse  thing  befall 
thee !'  Solomon,  indeed,  and  Saul,  and 
many  others,  were  able,  as  long  as  they 
walked  in  the  way  of  the  Lord,  to  keep 
the  grace  besioAved  upon  them.  As  soon 
as  the  Lord's  discipline  was  away  from 
them,  his  grace  went  away  also. 
.  .  .  .  I  hear  that  some  are  swelling 
with  pride  •,  and  yet  it  is  written :  '  Be 
not  proud,  but  fear.'  (Rom.  xi.  20.)*  Our 
Lord  was  brought  as  a  lamb  to  the 
slaughter;  and  as  a  sheep  before  his 
shearers  is  dumb,  so  He  opened  not  his 

mouth And  shall  then 

any  one,  who  lives  through  Him  and  in 
Him,  dare  to  be  proud  and  high-minded, 
unmindful  alike  of  the  conduct  which  He 
pursued,  and  of  the  commands  which  He 
laid  on  us,  either  by  his  own  mouth  or 
by  the  apostles  ?  The  servant  is  not 
greater  than  his  master;  let  then  those 
who  follow  the  Lord  be  humble,  quiet, 
and  silent,  and  so  walk  in  liis  footsteps; 
the  lower  each  man  makes  himself,  the 
higher  will  he  become  !"t 

When  a  certain  Lucian,  a  confessor. 
"  in  the  name  of  Paul,  a  martyr,"  in  com- 
pliance with  whose   last   commands   he 


*  [St.  Paul's  expression  is  ^»  C-^tiKi-.ipgiiw,  which  ' 
Cjiirian  has  made  into"IVoIi  altum  sapere." — i 
H.  J.  R.]  ! 

\  [This  passage  is  taken  with  some  abridgment  ' 
from  Cyprian.     Ep.  xiii.  ed  Ox. — H.  J.  li.l  J 

18 


pretended  to  be  acting,  bestowed  the  peace 
of  tlie  Church  on  the  fallen  brethren,  and 
gave  them  what  were  called  certificates 
of  communion,  (libellos  pacis,)  Cyprian 
would  not  allow  these  to  be  valid,  but 
said  on  the  contrary,  "Although  the  Lord 
has  declared,  that  the  nations  must  be 
baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  receive 
forgiveness  of  their  sins;  yet  this  man, 
forgetful  of  the  law  of  God,  preaches 
peace  and  forgiveness  of  sins  in  the  name 

of  Paul He  remembers 

not,  that  the  martyrs  do  not  make  the 
Gospel,  but  the  Gospel  the  martyrs." 
Ep.  xxii.  [Ep.  xxviii.  ed.  Ox.]  He  also 
made  the  same  declaration  expressly,  in 
the  discourse*  which  we  have  quoted 
above,  after  his  return  to  tlie  Church  : 
"Let  no  man  deceive  himself;  the  Lord 
alone  can  show  mercy.  He  alone  can 
grant  pardon  to  sins  which  are  committed 
against  himself,  who  bare  our  sins,  who 
suffered  for  us,  whom  God  gave  up  for 
our  sins.  Man  cannot  be  greater  than 
God  ;  nor  can  the  servant  forgive  the  sins 
committed  against  his  master;  lest  a  new 
crime  be  added  to  the  guilt  of  the  fallen 
brethren,  because  they  know  not  that 
which  is  written :  '  Cursed  is  he  that 
putteth  his  trust  in  man.'  Jerem.  xvii.  5. 
We  must  pray  to  the  Lord;  the  Lord 
must  be  appeased  for  our  satisfaction,  who 
declares  that  He  will  deny  those  who  deny 
Him,  who  alone  has  received  all  judg- 
ment from  the  Father Do 

the  martyrs  give  any  commands  .>  It  is 
well,  if  what   they  command  be  lawful 

and  just Do  the  martyrs  give 

any  commands.'  That  which  they  com- 
mand ought  to  be  what  is  written  in  the 
law  of  God ;  we  must  know  beforehand 
that  they  have  obtained,  at  the  hands  of 
God,  what  they  desire ;  and  then  we  are 
to  do  what  they  command,  but  not  before; 
for  it  does  not  follow,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  that  the  Divine  Majesty  lias  granted 
whatever  human  promises  have  declared. 

Thus  either  the  martyrs 

are  nothing,  if  the  Gospel  can  be  annulled, 
or  they  who  are  martyrs  by  the  Gospel 
can  have  no  power  against  that  Gospel. 
[Let  none  of  you,  my  beloved  brethren, 
tarnish  the  fame  of  the  martyrs  ;  let  none 
destroy  their  glories  and  their  crowns. 
The  strength  of  uncorrupted  faith  remains 
unimpaired ;]  nor  can  he  speak  or  do  any 
tlimg    against    Christ,   ichose    hope    and 


Sermo  de  lapsis. 
M  2 


138 

faith^  whose  virtue  and  glory  are  all  in 
ChriatP* 

And  yet  Cyprian  was  not  firm  and 
consistent  enough  in  the  opposition  which 
he  made  to  the  extravagant  honour  paid 
to  the  martyrs;  and  lie  himself  was  in 
some  degree  carried  away  by  the  spirit 
that  prevailed  among  the  multitude,  which 
he  ought  to  have  conquered  and  guided 
by  tlie  spirit  of  the  Gospel.  The  heat  of 
the  summer  in  the  climate  of  Africa  pro- 
ducing many  sicknesses,  he  yielded  so 
far  as  to  give  absolution  to  those  among 
the  fallen  brethren,  who  desired  the  com- 
nmnion  in  sickness  and  in  the  fear  of 
death,  and  supported  their  claim  to  it  by 
one  of  the  certificates  of  peace  (libelli 
pacis)  conferred  upon  them  by  a  witness  to 
the  faitLJ  In  his  report  to  the  Roman 
Church  he  gave,  as  his  grounds  for  this 
conduct,  that  he  wished,  by  means  of  this 
compliance,  in  some  degree  to  assuage 
the  violence  of  the  multitude,  and  thus  to 
counteract  the  machinations  of  those  who 
were  at  the  bottom  of  the  mischief,  and 
to  remove  from  his  own  character  the 
imputation  of  having  refused  the  due 
and  becoming  share  of  honour  to  the 
martyrs.J 

We  see  from  this  how  injurious  any 
compromise  with  a  prevailing  prejudice, 
any  halfway  defence  of  truth,  must  always 
be,  whether  it  proceed  from  a  want  of 
independence  and  firmness  in  our  own 
opinions,  or  from  fear  of  man  and  a  false 
policy.  If,  on  the  one  hand,  Cyprian 
combatted  the  false  confidence  in  the  in- 
tercession of  the  martrys  by  the  weapons 
of  truth,  he  supported  it,  on  the  other,  by 
yielding;  for  it  is  evident  that  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  martyrs  must  have  had 
a  peculiar  force  and  meaning,  as  soon  as 
all  the  fallen  brethren  in  a  like  condition 
and  in  the  same  moral  state  were  not 
treated  alike,  but  only  those  who  had 
this  recommendation  were  to  receive  the 
peace  of  the  Church  and  the  communion 
at  the  hour  of  death,  solely  on  account 
of  this  recommendation  ;  while  it  was  still 
highly    probable    that    many,    whc    had 

*  [I  have  taken  the  liberty  of  supplyincr  one 
lacuna  from  the  original  of  Cyyman,  and  inclosed 
it  in  a  parenthesis,  page  7G. — H.  .1.  R.] 

-[-  p]p.  xii.  xiii.  xiv.  (Ep.  xvili.  xix.  xx.  cd.  Ox.) 
t   Ep.  xiv.  (E[).  XX.  ed.  Ox.)  "Ad  illorum  vio- 

Icntiam  interim  quodcjuo  genere  niitigandam , 

cum  vidcietur  et  honor  niartyribu.s  habendus,  et 
eorum,  qui  omnia  turbare  cupicbant,  impetus  com- 
jirimendurt."  Of  tlic  other  lapsi,  on  the  contrary, 
lie  speaks  thus,  Ej).  xiii.  (xix.,)  "  Qui  nullo  libello 
a  martyribus  acccpto  invidiam  faciunt ;"  and  this 


APPARENT    VICTORY    OF    CYPRIAN. 


sought  no  support  from  this  one  means, 
had  nevertheless,  distinguished  themselves 
by  repentance  and  penance  more  than 
those  who  had  received  this  support. 
Now  this  conclusion,  to  which  his  con- 
duct would  give  a  very  fair  handle,  is 
favoured  by  the  language  which  he  made 
use  of  in  granting  this  permission,  "to 
those  who  might  be  assisted  in  regard  to 
their  sins  in  the  eyes  of  God  by  the  help 
of  the  martyrs,"*  instead  of  pointing  the 
attention  of  all,  without  distinction,  to 
reliance  only  on  one  Mediator,  and  of 
blaming  most  unreservedly  the  fanciful 
self-confidence  of  those  who  believed  that 
they  had  really  gained  something  of  con- 
sequence by  means  of  the  human  medi- 
ation, of  which  they  had  been  assured. 
This  inconsistency  was  exactly  the  thing 
to  lay  him  open  to  his  enemies  in  a  manner 
which  they  well  knew  how  to  use. 

Another  circumstance,  which  would  of 
course  serve  to  give  greater  weight  to  the 
opposition  party  in  its  connection  with  the 
fallen  brethren,  was  the  powerful  voice  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  which  had  declared 
itself  in  favour  of  the  milder  principle,  not 
in  the  case  of  all  the  fallen,  but  of  those 
who  had  become  sick  afterwards.  Cyprian 
declared  also,  that  regard  for  the  Roman 
Church,  with  which  he  was  always  un- 
willing to  have  any  differences,  had  partly 
moved  him  to  this  compliance.!  But  this 
Church  had  acted  more  in  the  spirit  of 
evangelic  truth,  because  she  directed  the 
fallen  brethren  to  the  one  only  Media- 
tor, and  allowed  of  no  distinction  among 
them  except  that  of  repentant  and  unre- 
pentant. In  that  first  letter  addressed  to  the 
clergy  of  Carthage,  she  had  declared  in  re- 
gard to  the  fallen  brethren.  Ep.  ii.  (Ep. 
viii.  ed.  Ox.  )  "We  have  separated  them 
from  us,  yet  we  have  not  left  them  to  them- 
selves, but  we  have  exhorted  them,  and  do 
exhort  them,  to  be  penitent,  if  they  may 
thus  be  able  to  receive  pardon  from  Him, 
ivho  alone  can  hestow  it :  that  they  may  not, 
being  deserted  by  us,  become  worse.    .    . 

If,  therefore,  any  who  have 

fallen  into  this  temptation  are  seized  with 
sickness,  show  repentance,  and  desire  the 
communion,  they  must  be  assisted." 

And  yet,  by  Christian  prudence  in  the 
rest  of  his  conduct,  by  uniting  mildness 
with  earnestness,  by  instructions  and  by 

I  '  ~ 


Auxilio  eorum  adjuvari  apud  Dominum  in 
dclictis  suis  possunt. 

f  f^p.xiv.  (Ep.  XX. ed.Ox.,)to  the  Roman  clergy; 
"  Standum  putavi  et  cum  vestra  sententia,  ne  actus 
nostcr,qiii  adunatus  esse  et  consentire  circa  omnia 
"  invidia"  or  "odium"  he  was,  therefore,  afraid  of.  ]  debet,  in  aliquo  discreparet." 


THE    VISITATION FELICISSIATDS. 


139 


friendly,  fatherly  representations,  by  which  I 
he  won  the  better  spirits  among  the  con- 
fessors, by  the  firmness  with  which  he 
opposed  the  obstinate  resistance  of  the 
presbyters,  by  the  love  and  the  respect 
with  which  the  greater  part  of  the  com- 
munity viewed  him,  bishop  Cyprian  ap- 
peared already  to  have  restored  tranquillity 
to  Carthage,  and  he  was  enjoying  the  hope 
of  returning,  as  soon  as  the  Decian  perse- 
cution ceased,  to  the  Church,  from  which 
he  had  unwillingly  been  absent  a  whole 
year,  and  of  celebrating  with  them  the  feast 
of  Easter,  A.  D.  251.  But  before  this  hope 
could  be  realized,  he  had  to  learn  that  the 
machinations  of  the  party  had  been  of  a 
deeper  nature,  and  that  they  were  too 
closely  bound  together  to  allow  of  their 
being  separated  so  easily.  The  fire  which 
was  smouldering  in  secret,  only  wanted 
an  opportunity  to  break,  out  openly.  Cy- 
prian afforded  them  this  opportunity,  by 
the  exercise  of  his  episcopal  power  in  a 
matter  of  considerable  importance. 

He  despatched,  it  seems,  before  he  re- 
turned to  his  Church,  two  bishops  and 
two  presbyters,  as  his  deputies,  with  full 
powers  to  hold  a  visitation  :  they  were  to 
assign  to  the  poor,  who  from  age  or  sick- 
ness were  unable  to  do  any  thing  for  their 
own  support,  so  much  out  of  the  Church 
chest,  as  might  be  necessary  for  the  sup- 
ply of  their  bodily  necessities  ;  they  were 
to  give  whatever  might  be  needful  to  those 
who,  though  they  had  an  employment, 
were  unable  to  earn  a  livelihood  by  it,  or 
who  wanted  money  in  order  to  enable 
them  to  buy  the  tools  and  materials  ne- 
cessary to  carry  on  their  trade,  or  who, 
having  been  ruined  in  their  business  by 
the  persecution,  were  inclined  to  begin  it 
again  ;  and  lastly,  they  were  to  prepare  a 
description  of  all  the  poor  to  be  maintained 
by  the  Church  chest,  distinguishing  their 
ages,  circumstances,  and  conduct  during 
the  persecution,  in  order  that  the  bishop, 
whose  business  it  was  to  learn  to  know  all 
of  them  accurately,  might  promote  the 
worthy  ones,  and  what  was  here  particu- 
larly designed,  the  tender  and  humble- 
minded,  to  such  offices  in  the  Church  as 
they  were  capable  of  filling.  The  latter 
regulation  had  this  advantage,  that  the 
powers  of  tliese  persons  would  be  suitably 
employed  for  the  service  of  the  Church, 
that  they  would  also  receive  a  proportion- 
ate degree  of  care,  and  at  the  same  time  a 
burden  would  be  removed  from  the  Church 
chest.  The  qualities,  which  were  parti- 
cularly to  be  attended  to,  mildness  and 
humiliti/j  were  peculiarly  requisite,  during 


this  time  of  ferment  and  unquiet  in  the 
Church,  for  those  who  were  to  enter  its 
service,  that  thus  the  peace  of  the  Church 
might  be  restored  on  a  safe  foundation, 
and  the  seeds  of  dissension  choked.  The 
presbyterian  opposition  party  might  not 
concede  to  the  bishop  the  right  of  under- 
taking such  a  visitation,  and  making  such 
a  distribution  of  the  Church  chest  of  his 
own  power,  without  calling  together  the 
whole  college  of  presbyters,  or  at  least 
they  might  object  to  such  a  right  being 
exercised  by  Cyprian,  on  the  ground  that 
they  did  not  any  longer  acknowledge  hi?n 
as  their  bishop ;  but  it  would  have  been 
utterly  against  their  plan  to  allow  him  to 
carry  through  such  an  act  of  episcopal 
Church  government,  by  which  his  own 
autliority  would  he  confirmed  in  the 
Ciiurch,  and  the  Church  would  be  united 
more  closely  with  him,  and  thus  his  party- 
would  gain  a  considerable  accession  of 
strength.  The  deacon  Felicissimus,  who 
might  very  well  possess  considerable  in- 
fluence over  some  part  of  the  Church  in 
his  capacity  of  deacon,  (for  the  deacons 
appear  to  have  had  greater  power  in  the 
North  African  Church,  as  well  as  in  its 
cognate  Church,*  the  Spanish,  than  else- 
where,) who  was,  also,  from  some  circum- 
stances which  we  do  not  know  very 
accurately,  a  very  influential  organ  of  that 
party,  and,  perhaps,  particularly  so  in  con- 
sequence of  having  the  administration  of 
part  of  the  Church  chest|  under  his  care  : 


*  Concil.  Illiberit.  c.  hxvii.  "  Diaconus  regens 
plebem." 

f  We  may  learn  from  Ep.  xlix.  (Ep.  lii.  ed.  Ox.,) 
of  Cyprian,  that  in  the  North  African  Church,  the 
deacons  had  to  keep  and  administer  the  funds  of  the 
Church  chest.  The  accusations  made  against 
Felicissimus  of  "  fraudes"  and  "  rapine,"  Ep.  Iv. 
(Ep.  lix.  ed.  Ox.,)  "  pecuniae  commissse  sibi  frau- 
dator,"  relate  to  this  point.  There  were  similar 
accusations  against  Novatus,  the  presbyter  and 
president  of  the  Church,  to  which  Fehcissimus 
was  appointed  deacon.  Cyprian  was,  however, 
an  enemy  to  both  of  these  men,  and  we  must  not 
take  these  accusations  from  his  mouth,  as  the 
evidence  of  an  unimpeachable  witness.  An  inde- 
pendent apphcation  of  part  of  the  Church  funds, 
which  were  deposited  in  this  Daughter-Church,  in 
which,  according  to  their  views,  they  might  be- 
lieve themselves  justified  by  their  relations  to  the 
bishop,  an  application  of  these  funds  perhaps  di- 
rected by  party  spirit,  and  partial  views,  would 
probably  be  represented  by  Cyprian  as  an  unfaith- 
fulness in  their  duty.  At  all  events,  we  are  too 
destitute  of  unprejudiced  accounts,  to  be  able  to 
decide  with  any  thing  like  certainty  on  the  subject. 

[It  appears*  from  the  following  passage  of  Ori- 

*  [This  addition  to  the  note  is  incorporated  from 
the  addenda  in  vol.  iii. — H.  J.  R. 


140 


NORTH    AFRICAN    SYNOD,    A.  D.   251. 


this  deacon  tliought  that  he  was  justified 
in  speaking  a  word  or  two,  in  a  matter 
■  which  concerned  the  appHcation  of  Church 
fmijg  ; — he  used  all  his  persuasion,  all  his 
influence  and  power  to  excite  a  determined 
spirit  of  opposition  to  this  episcopal  ordi- 
nance ;  he  declared  in  particular  to  the 
poor,  who  belonged  to  the  Church  of 
Novatus,  in  wliich  he  was  appointed  dea- 
con, that  he  would  soon  contrive  to  satisfy 
all  their  wants ;  and  he  threatened  them, 
that  if  they  appeared  before  the  episcopal 
commissioners,  he  would  never  afterwards 
admit  them  to  the  communion  of  the 
Church.*  This  Church  became  now  the 
assembling  place  of  all  tlie  fallen  brethren, 
who  would  not  wait  with  patience  till  the 
lime  for  the  decision  of  the  whole  matter ; 
here  they  were  all  received  into  Church 


gen,  Commentar,  in  Matth.  f.  443,  that  the  deacons 
had  to  attend  to  the  distribution  of  the  Church 
funds;    o«   Si  fJt»   kiKcd;   Si-Mt-.vot   Jk/xcuvtsc  tu.  t«c 

x.tKa>:  <!(  -xiiTX  oUcnfAouvTiu  i:XA*  <ra)§c/ivT5c  Tov  vc/ut- 

tl(  K-.yOV  TTTCe^OKV  SJof/.cVCeV.  K.  T.  X.] 

*  Every  thing  here  depends  on  what  is  the 
genuine  reading  and  the  proper  explanation  of  the 
difficult  words  in  Cyprian:  Ep.  xxxviii.  (Ep.  xli. 
ed.  Ox.,)  whether  we  should  read  "  comminatus, 
quod  secum  in  niorte,"'  or  "  in  monte  non  commu- 
nicarent,  qui  nobis  obtemperare  voluissent."  Ac- 
cording to  the  reading  "  in  morte"  two  explanations 
may  be  offered :  the  one  by  referring  the  words 
"  in  morte,"  to  Fclicissimus,  and  then  the  sense 
would  be,  that  he  himself,  even  in  his  dying  hour, 
would  never  recognise  them  as  Christian  brethren, 
that  he  would  excommunicate  them,  and  never  be 
reconciled  to  them.  We  do  not,  however,  in  this 
case,  see  very  well,  why  such  a  threat  should  be 
so  very  dreadful  to  the  Christians  of  Carthage. 
Again,  if  we  refer  the  words  "  in  morte"  to  the  sub- 
ject contained  in  the  verb  "  conmmunicarcnt," 
which  certairdy  comes  nearer  to  the  run  of  the 
whole  passage,  then  the  sense  will  be  this : — that 
they  should  never,  even  in  their  dying  hours,  be 
received  into  Church  communion  by  him  ;  that  is 
to  say,  they  should  never  receive  the  communion 
from  him  as  deacon,  an  office  in  which  it  was  his 
business  to  bring  the  consecrated  sacrament  to 
those  who  were  sick.  This  last  explanation  makes 
good  sense,  if  we  bear  in  mind  that  Felicissimus 
was  deacon  of  one  particular  parish  Church,  and 
had  a  good  understanding  with  Novatus,  the  pas- 
tor of  that  Church,  so  that  he  would  have  the 
power  of  refusing  the  communion  to  those  who 
dwelt  in  this  part  of  the  Church  diocese.  An  en- 
tirely similar  sense  will  result  from  the  reading 
"  in  monte."  We  must  then  suppose  that  the 
Church,  to  which  Novatus  and  Felicissimus  be- 
longed, was  situated  on  an  eminence  in  or  near 
Carthage  (in  monte,)  and  in  this  case  we  should 
be  reminded  of  the  Donatists  at  Komc,  who  were 
called  Montcnses,  from  holding  their  congrega- 
tions on  a  hill.  Felicissimus  threatened  to  exclude 
all  those,  who  chose  to  obey  Cyprian,  from  com- 
munion in  this  Church. 


communion  without  any  preparatory  steps, 
and  here,  therefore,  was  a  rallying  point 
for  all  discontented  spirits,  which  could 
not  fail  to  have  the  most  prejudicial  con- 
sequences in  regard  to  the  discipline  and 
order  of  the  Church. 

Cyprian  was  induced,  by  these  troubles, 
to  delay  his  return  to  Carthage  till  after 
Easter,  A.  D.  251,  until  he  could  reckon 
on  meeting  with  his  North  African  col- 
leagues for  the  purpose  of  holding  the 
yearly  synod,  and  thus  find  a  support  in 
them  against  the  obstinacy  of  his  oppo- 
nents, and  be  able  to  unite  himself  with 
them,  under  the  circumstances  of  the  pre- 
sent controversy,  after  mature  considera- 
tion, in  some  firm  and  consistent  line  of 
conduct,  based  on  general  principles.  This 
Council  of  the  North  African  Church 
decided  on  a  middle  plan  between  the 
extravagant  harshness  of  denying  all  hope 
to  the  fallen  brethren,  and  the  opposite 
extreme  of  weak  compliance  ;  so  that  they 
might  uphold  Christian  discipline,  and 
yet  not  drive  the  fallen  brethren  to  de- 
spair, by  refusing  them  unconditionally, 
and  forever,  absolution  and  re-admission 
into  Church  communion,  in  such  wise  as 
to  bring  them,  perhaps,  at  last,  to  give 
themselves  wholly  up  to  their  vices,  or 
relapse  into  heathenism.  First,  the  dif- 
ferent nature*  of  their  offences  was  to  be 
well  weighed,  and  the  communion  was 
to  be  administered  to  all,  even  the  "  sacri- 
ficati"  (those  who  had  sacrificed  to  the 
heathen  idols,)  if  they  showed  repentance 
in  their  conduct,  at  least  in  any  case  of 
mortal  sickness.  If  these  persons  after- 
wards recovered,  they  were  not  to  be  cur- 
tailed of  the  benefit  bestowed  upon  them 
by  the  grace  of  God,  but  were  to  continue 
in  the  communion  of  the  Church.l  When 
the  persecution  broke  out  again  with  in- 
creased violence,  a  relaxation  of  this  rule 
was  voluntarily  made,  which  was  prompt- 
ed by  the  spirit  of  Christian  love  and  wis- 
dom, which  was  this — the  communion 
was  to  be  administered  to  all  who  had 
shown  proofs  of  repentance  in  their  con- 
duct, in  order  that  they  might  not  go  into 
the  struggle  unarmed,  but  strengthened  by 
communion  with  the  body  of  the  Lord.;}; 
But  those  who,  while  they  had  shown  no 
single  mark  of  repentance  in  their  whole 
beliaviour,  first  expressed  their  wish  for 
the  communion  of  the  Church  on  the  bed 

*  The  diflerent  guilt  of  the  "  sacrificati,"  ac- 
cording to  the  different  modes  in  which  they  had 
been  brought  to  recaait,  and  of  the  "  libellatici." 

\  Cyprian,  Ep.  Hi.  (Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.) 

i  Ep.  liv.  (Ep.  Ivi.  ed.  Ox.) 


CHURCH    COMMUNION — SCHISM    OF    NOVATIAN. 


41 


of  sickness,  were  not  then  to  receive  the 
communion,  because  it  was  not  sorrow 
for  their  sins,  but  the  warning  of  death 
hanging  over  them  which  induced  this 
wish  ;  and  he  deserves  no  consolation  in 
death,  who  does  not  think  of  death  before 
it  is  close  at  hand.  In  this  exposition, 
the  truly  Christian  endeavour  is  decidedly 
made,  to  call  men's  attention  to  the  es- 
sentials of  a  true  repentance,  and  to  warn 
them  against  a  false  reliance  on  the  '  opus 
operatum'  of  absolution  and  the  commu- 
nion.* But  yet,  in  many  cases,  neverthe- 
less, a  true  repentance  may  be  produced  by 
the  near  approach  of  death,  which  He 
alone,  who  can  look  into  the  inward  heart 
can  distinguish  from  a  hypocritical  peni- 
tence, which  is  so  much  more  common  ; 
and  therefore,  they  might  well  have  avoided 
this  harshness,  without  giving  any  room 
for  false  security,  if  they  would  only 
have  explained,  more  justly  and  clearly 
the  real  nature  of  absolution,  (see  above.) 
In  this  Church  synod,  a  sentence  of  con- 
demnation was  also  pronounced  against 
the  party  of  Felicissimus,  and  Cyprian 
was  thus  able,  by  his  connection  with 
the  North  African  bishops  to  crush  this 
division.  But  the  party  did  not  imme- 
diately give  up  their  opposition ;  they 
endeavoured  to  spread  themselves  more 
widely  in  this  part  of  the  Church ;  and 
several  individual  African  bishops,  who 
were  at  variance  with  their  colleagues,  or 
had  been  deprived  for  their  bad  conduct, 
joined  them.  They  elected  Fortunatus, 
one  of  the  five  rebellious  presbyters,  to 
the  bishopric  of  Carthage,  in  the  place  of 
Cyprian.  They  sent  deputies  to  Rome  to 
win  over  this  chief  Church  [Hauptkirche] 
of  the  west  to  their  side,  and  they  ob- 
tained there  a  hearing  for  their  accusa- 
tions against  Cyprian ;  but  they  were 
unable  to  dissolve  the  bond  of  union  be- 
tween him  and  Cornelius,  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  although  their  outcry  had  caused 
a  momentary  impression.  So,  in  a  letter, 
in  which  the  spirit  of  the  episcopal  theo- 
cracy, a  Jewish,  rather  than  an  evangelical 
notion,  which  is,  in  fact,  the  fancy  of  the 
Old  Testament  priesthood  in  the  Christian 
Church,  is  very  prominently  displayed, 
Cyprian  urges  it  on  the  Romish  bishop, 
that  he  should  defend  the  imity  of  the 
Church,  founded  on  the  mutual  connec- 
tion of  the  bishops  against  schismatics  ; 
and  in  the  same  letter  he  also  zealously 
advocates  the  independence  of  bishops, 
in  their  dioceses  ;  "  for,  since  it  is  agreed 


upon  by  all  of  us,"  he  writes,  "  that  it 
is  just  and  right  that  each  man's  cause 
should  be  tried  in  the  place  in  which  the 
offence  was  committed,  and  since  to  every 
pastor  a  •portion  of  the  Jlock  is  assigned 
for  him  to  govern^  and  render  up  here- 
after an  account  to  the  Lord  of  his  gov- 
ernment ;  those  who  are  under  our  ju- 
risdiction ought  not  to  run  about,  and, 
by  their  delusive  arts  and  boldness,  de- 
stroy the  unity  of  the  bishops,  who  are 
united  together;  but  they  ouglit  to  plead 
their  cause  there,  where  they  can  have 
also  accusers  and  witnesses  of  their 
offence."* 

The  second  schism  arose  in  the  Church 
of  Rome  ;  and  as  Cornelius  of  Rome  co- 
operated with  Cyprian  of  Carthage,  to 
quash  the  first,  so  in  this,  Cyprian  joined 
with  Cornelius  to  maintain  the  unity  of 
the  Church.  Like  the  former,  this  second 
dissension  arose  from  a  contest  about  the 
election  of  a  bishop,  and  from  a  conten- 
tion of  opposite  opinions  on  the  subject 
of  Church  penance;  only  with  this  dif- 
ference, that  there  the  schism  was  set  on 
foot  by  the  laxer,  and  here  by  the  stricter 
party.  Much  which  had  taken  place 
during  the  Decian  persecution,  gave  the 
outward  occasion  to  the  outbreak  of  this 
schism,  as  it  had  done  with  the  other. 
We  have  before  observed,  that  the  prevail- 
ing tendency  in  the  Roman  Church,  on  tlie 
subject  of  penance,  was  to  the  milder  doc- 
trine ;  but  still,  it  had  also  a  stricter  party, 
at  the  head  of  which  was  Novatianus, 
who  had  made  himself  known  as  a  theo- 
logical witer.  We  are  without  accurate 
accounts  of  the  character  of  this  man, 
from  which  we  could  obtain  sufficient 
light  to  enable  us  to  judge  properly  of 
his  notions  on  this  point,  and  his  whole 
conduct  in  this  matter,  when  considered 
with  relation  to  his  individual  disposition  : 
I  for  what  his  angry  enemies  have  said  of 
j  him,  and  what  completely  bears  upon  it 
I  the  mark  of  passion  and  exaggeration, 
naturally  deserves  no  credit.  If  we  en- 
deavour to  eliminate  the  real  facts  from 
the  disfiguring  and  spiteful  representations 
made  by  the  enemies  of  Novatian,  the 
following  seems  to  be  the  most  probable 
statement  of  the  case:  Novatian,  in  con- 
sequence of  mental  struggles,  which  pro- 
ceeded from  tlie  earnestness  of  his  dispo- 
sition, had  fallen  into  a  nervous  disease 
or  phantasy  ;  such  a  condition,  in  short,  as 
was  then  considered  a  case  of  demoniacal 
possession.    Having  probably  beforehand, 


Ep.  lii.  (Iv.  ed.  Ox.) 


Ep.  Iv.  ad  Cornel.  (Ep.  lix  ed.  Ox.) 


142 


novatian's  character. 


by  his  inward  stnicfgles,  been  prepared  to 
believe  in  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  the 
Divine  nature  of  Christianity,  he  had  to 
thank  the  prayers  of  an  exorcist  for  a  tem- 
porary relief  from  his  calamity.  From  this 
powerful  convulsion  of  his  whole  nature, 
he  fell  into  a  severe  illness,  from  which, 
in  the  first  instance,  his  real  and  radical 
cure  proceeded,  hi  this  sickness  his  faith 
was  decided,  and  when  he  thought  him- 
self near  his  end,  he  was  baptized  on  his 
sick  bed.  hi  Christianity  he  found  peace 
and  tranquillity,  and  a  healing  power.  As 
he  distinguished  himself  by  his  firmness 
in  the  faith,  by  the  clearness  of  his  Chris- 
tian knowledge,  to  which  his  writings 
bear  witness,  by  a  happy  power  of  teach- 
ing, and  by  a  zeal  for  holiness,  which 
afterwards  led  him  to  an  ascetic  life, 
bishop  Fabian  ordained  him  presbyter, 
overlooking  the  circumstance  that  he  had 
first  made  known  his  faith,  and  been  bap- 
tized on  the  bed  of  sickness.  The  clergy 
of  Rome,  were  from  the  first,  discontented 
•with  this  proceeding,  because  they  main- 
tained firmly  the  letter  of  the  law  of  the 
Church,  which  was,  that  no  man,  who 
Avas  baptized  on  the  bed  of  sickness  no 
"clinicus,"  should  be  ordained;  but  Fa- 
bian judged  more  wisely,  according  to  the 
spirit  of  this  law,  the  only  intention  of 
which  was,  to  keep  out  of  the  clerical 
profession  all  those  who,  without  real  re- 
pentance, persuasion,  and  knowledge,  had 
been  induced  to  be  baptized  by  the  tem- 
porary agitation  caused  by  the  fear  of 
death.  In  Novatian,  the  necessity  for 
such  a  precaution  was  contradicted  by  his 
subsequent  conduct.  For  a  considerable 
time,  he  exchanged  the  active  life  of  a 
practical  member  of  the  clergy,  for  the 
still,  retired  life  of  an  ascetic ;  yet,  never- 
theless, he  afterwards  suffered  himself  to 
be  induced  to  return  to  the  active  duties 
of  his  office,  but,  perhaps,  not  until  they 
wished  to  put  him  at  the  head  of  a  party.* 


I  Some  slight  intimation  of  Cyprian's  by 
no  means  amount  to  a  proof,  that  Nova- 
tian, before  his  conversion,  had  been  a 
Stoic  philosopher,  and  that  in  some  de- 


•  Wc  must  here  take  particular  notice  of  the 
synodal  letter  of  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome,  to 
Tabius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  of  which  Eusebius 
(vi.  43,)  has  preserved  a  fragment.  'J'his  letter  is 
well  worthy  of  attention,  as  characteristic  of  that 
tendency  of  the  churchly  spirit  to  confuse  the 
outward  and  the  inward,  which  began  to  prevail 
so  Kfrikingly  at  Home  from  early  times.  It  is 
made  a  matter  of  reproach  to  Novatian,  that  the 
healing  of  the  so-called  demornacal  possession  (sec 
above)  by  the  exorcists  of  the  Roman  Church  was 
the  first  cause  of  his  believing.  Whether  this  he 
true  or  not,  it  cannot  bring  a  taint  on  Novatian's 
Christianity  in  any  case.  Itwa.«  indifferent  through 
what  channel  he  was  led  to  Christianity,  provided 
that,  when  he  had  once  become  a  (Jhristian,  he 


attained  a  living  faith,  a  genuine  Christian  dispo- 
sition, and  a  pure  Christian  knowledge.  This 
reproach  of  CorneUus,  that  Satan  had  been  the 
occasion  of  Novatian's  faith  (^  yi  cp-.p/un  t'm  ttio-- 
rwa-at  y«y(,\»  o  o-otT^tvatc,)  was  as  foolish  as  it  was 
unworthy  of  a  Christian;  just  as  if  the  workings 
of  evil  must  not  often  serve  as  the  foundation  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  '  After  the  cure  of  this  de- 
moniacal possession,  he  fell  into  a  severe  sick- 
ness,' (which  may  be  explained  naturally  enough; 
the  crisis  in  his  whole  organic  frame,  to  which 
he  may  attribute  the  cure  of  his  state  of  phan- 
tasy, being  the  cause  of  the  sickness,)  '  and,  being 
in  danger  of  death,  he  received  the  rite  of  baptism 
only  by  sprinkling,  as  his  condition  required,' 
(the  baptismus  clinicorum — not  the  baptism  by 
immersion^  as  then  usually  practised,)  <if  one 
can  properly  say,  that  such  an  one  as  he  was 
really  baptized.'  (How  carnally  and  grossly  does 
the  prejudice  of  passion  and  the  narrow-hearted 
spirit  of  the  Romish  hierarchy  here  make  the 
bishop  speak.)  '  After  this  he  received  none  of 
those  things,  which  the  Church  requires  to  be  re- 
ceived, and  he  was  not  confirmed  by  the  bishop; 
and  how,  tberefore,  could  he  thus  expect  to  receive 
the  Holy  Spirit!'  A  bishop  of  Rome,  appa- 
rently Fabian,  afterwards  ordained  him  presbyter, 
although  the  rest  of  the  clergy  would  not  allow 
the  ordination  of  a  person  baptized  by  sprinkling 
to  be  valid.  The  bishop  here  must  have  wished 
to  make  an  exception — apparently  a  person  of  a 
more  free  and  evangelic  spirit  who  acted  quite 
rightly  in  accordance  with  the  spirit,  if  not  the 
letter,  of  that  ecclesiastical  law  against  the  ordi- 
nation of  persons  so  baptized.  (The  council  of 
Laodicea,  which  expressed  this  ancient  law  in  its 
twelfth  canon,  gives  as  the  reason  for  it, — that 
such  a  faith,  first  making  its  appearance  when  a 
man  lies  on  a  bed  of  sickness,  does  not  arise  from 
free  persuasion,  but  is  something  forced:  which 
may  be  true  in  many  cases,  and  the  council,  there- 
fore, allowed  an  exception  to  be  valid  in  the  case 
of  any  one,  who  gave  proofs  of  zeal  and  faith ; 
and  such  an  exception  may  have  been  made  in  re- 
gard to  Novatian.)  Cornelius  further  reproaches 
him  with  having  shut  himself  up  in  a  chamber 
out  of  fear,  during  the  persecution,  and  refusing 
to  leave  it  in  order  to  exercise  his  priestly  office  in 
favour  of  those  who  needed  assistance.  When 
his  deacons  required  him  to  do  this,  he  sent  them 
back  with  this  answer,  '  that  he  was  now  the 
votary  of  a  diflferent  philosophy.'  W'e  must  here, 
we  acknowledge,  have  recourse  to  conjecture  to 
separate  the  facts,  which  are  the  groundwork  of 
this  part  of  the  history,  from  the  form  in  which 
the  hatred  of  Cornelius  has  represented  them.  By 
the  words  iTig^a.  <f>/xc<r;pw,  we  are  probably  to  under- 
stand the  more  retired  life  of  the  ascetic,  as  con- 
trasted with  the  clerical  profession;  Novatian 
might  have  retired  for  a  time  into  solitude,  as  an 
ascetic,  and  have  withdrawn  himself  from  public 
business.  This  answers  well  to  the  strict  charac- 
ter, which  his  principles  of  penitence  bespeak, 
and,  as  an  ascetic,  he  was  likely  to  be  held  in  con- 
siderable reverence    by   the  Church.     Novatian 


A    CONTEST    OP    PRINCIPLES, 


o^ree  the  spirit  of  the  Stoic  morality, 
mingling  itself  with  his  Christianity,  had 
produced  the  sternness  of  his  notions  in 
these  tilings.  As  his  principles  are  so 
clearly  to  be  explained  from  the  sternness 
of  his  Christian  character,  and  as  he  was 
acting  in  this  instance  in  the  spirit  of  a 
whole  party  of  the  Church,  existing  at 
that  time,  there  is  the  less  need  to  resort 
to  an  explanation,  deduced  from  an  exter- 
nal cause,  which  is  supported  by  no  his- 
torical proof.* 

The  passionate  adversaries  of  Novatian 
accused  him  of  being  induced  by  ambitious 
desires  of  the  episcopal  dignity,  to  excite 
these  disturbances,  and  set  himself  up  for 
the  head  of  a  party.  But  this  is  in  the 
usual  style  of  theological  polemics : 
namely,  to  deduce  schisms  and  heresies 
from  external  and  unhallowed  motives, 
although  they  have  no  proof  of  their  ex- 
istence. Novatian,  on  some  opportu- 
nity after  the  vacation  of  the  Roman  .see 
by  the  death  of  Fabian,  had  pledged  him- 
self by  an  oath,  that  he  would  not  sue  for 
the  episcopal  dignity,  nor  desire  such  an 
office,  although  he  might,  through  the 
reverence  entertained  for  him,  as  an  asce- 
tic and  a  dogmatical  theologian,  by  a  great 
part  of  the  Church,  perhaps  have  obtained 

may  have  been  wrong  in  allowing  himself  to  he 
seduced  by  a  false  asceticism,  and  to  forget  Chris. 
tian  charity,  so  as  to  refuse  to  leave  his  spiritual 
tranquillity  and  solitude,  and  assist  his  brethren, 
who  needed  his  priestly  assistance ;  but  Cornelius 
allowed  himself  to  ascribe  to  this  conduct  a  diffe- 
rent motive,  which  was  utterly  unsuited  to  the 
character  of  Novatian.-j" 

*  It  is  by  no  means  clear  that  the  enemies  of 
Novatian  themselves  believed  in  this  account  of 
the  source  of  his  notions.  Though  Cyprian  ac- 
cused his  notions  of  being  more  stoical  than  Chris- 
tian, (Ep.  Hi.  ad  Antonian.;  Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox,)  yet 
this  may  very  naturally  be  explained  as  alluding 
to  the  nature  of  these  notions,  and  not  to  their 
source ;  and  though  he  reproaches  him  thus  :  "  Jac- 
tet  se  licet  et  philosophiam  vel  eloquentiam  suam 
Buperbis  vocibus  praedicet ;"  yet  the  first  part  of 
this  sentence  alludes  to  the  rg^i^v,  the  pallium  of 
the  tlo-^JcT/ic,  (see  the  foregoing  note,)  or  to  the  fome 
of  an  admirable  dogmatical  writer,  which  Novatian 
had  acquired  as  the  author  of  the  book  "  de  Regula 
Fidei,"  or  "de  Trinitate,"  as  even  Cornelius  says 
of  him,  in  the  letter  we  have  quoted  in  the  forego- 
ing note.  cJtoc  0  ioyfAa.Ttv'TK,  o  ms  iK>aJia-/ao-riK>i; 


[t  I  have  distinguished  the  passages  which  Dr. 
Neander  has  taken  from  the  letter  of  Cornelius 
in  Eusebius,  by  inverted  commas,  to  distinguish 
them  from  his  remarks  upon  them,  which  are  in 
parentheses.  He  has  left  them  in  the  German 
without  any  marks  of  quotation  ;  but  I  felt  them 
requisite  for  the  sake  of  clearness  in  English.  The 
theological  reader  need  not  be  reminded,  that  in 
Eusebius  and  other  Greek  writers,  Novatian  is 
commonly  called  Novatus. — H.  J.  R.] 


143 


it  easily.  We  have  no  reason  here,  with 
bishop  Cornelius,  to  accuse  Novatian  of 
perjury.  An  ascetic  who  loved  repose, 
and  a  theologian,  who  busied  himself  un- 
disturbedly with  his  dogmatical  specula- 
tions, he  might  be  in  good  earnest,  when 
he  declared,  that  he  had  no  inclination  for 
an  office  so  overwhelmed  with  business, 
as  the  bishopric  of  Rome  then  was.  .How- 
ever, Cornelius  knew  that  he  sighed  in 
secret,  after  the  episcopal  dignity ;  but 
whence,  we  may  ask,  had  Cornelius  the 
eyes  to  see  in  secret  and  penetrate  the 
hidden  recesses  of  his  adversary's  heart! 
Cyprian  himself  gives  us  a  hint  that  a 
party  controversy  about  principles,  which 
at  first  was  considered  wholly  of  an  ob- 
jective kind,  had  preceded,  and  tliat  when 
a  schism  was  by  this  made  unavoidable, 
the  opposite  party  then  first  set  up  another 
bishop,  as  their  head,  in  opposition  to 
Cornelius.*  Novatian's  zeal  oidy  out  of 
regard  for  the  supposed  purity  of  the 
Church,  moved  him  to  contend  against 
the  decay  of  Church  discipline,  without 
wishing  or  meaning  any  thing  further. 
This  man,  therefore,  firm  in  his  persuasion, 
and  violently  zealous  in  defence  of  that  per- 
suasion, but  as  far  as  natural  disposition  is 
concerned,  utterly  removed  from  all  rest- 

'  less  and  outward  motives,  was  made  the 
head  of  a  party,  against  his  own  will,  by 
those  who  agreed  with  him  in  principles, 
and  compelled  to  take  upon  himself  the 
rank  of  bishop.  He  might,  therefore,  in 
this  respect,  in  his  letter  to  Dionysius, 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  justly  appeal  to  his 
having  been  carried  on  against.  Jiis  will.'f 
The  man  who  was  really  the  active  soul 
of  this  party,  and  whose  influence  pro- 

j  bably  causecl  the  party  to  break  loose  from 
Cornelius  entirely,  and  create  another 
bishop  for  itself,  came  from  a  different 
quarter.  That  Carthaginian  presbyter, 
Novatus,  who  had  been  the  soul  of  dis- 
sension in  the  North  African  Church,  had 
removed  himself  thence,  when  Cyprian 
obtained  the  upper  hand ;  whether  it  was 
that  he  was  no  longer  contented  with  the 
principles  of  the  party  of  Felicissimus,  and 
yet  would  not  be  reconciled  to  Cyprian, 
and  acknowledge  him  for  his  bishop;  or 
whether  it  was  07ihi  the  failure  of  his 
machinations  against  Cyprian  which  drove 


•  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixii.  (Ep.xlv.ed.  Ox.)  "  Di ver- 
sa; partis  obstinata  et  inflexibilis  pertinacia  runt 
tantunt  matris  sinum  recusavit;  sed  etiam  glis- 
cente  et  in  pejim  rccrudescenie  discordia,  cpisco- 
pum  sibi  constituit." 

[A  few  words,  of  no  great  importance,  are  left 
out  in  this  quotation. — H.  J.  R.] 

I  or/  dxaiy  )i;:^fi)t. 


144 


CORNELIUS NOVATIAN DIONYSIUS. 


him  to  this  step.  He  had  betaken  him- 
self to  Rome,  and  tliere  he  found  tlie  seeds 
of  that  contention  ah-eady  sown.  It  was 
in  his  very  nature  not  to  be  quiet  and 
neutral,  while  strife  and  agitation  were 
going  forward.  According  to  the  princi- 
ples which  he  had  defended  at  Carthage 
in  connection  with  the  four  presbyters  and 
Felicissimus,  he  ought  to  have  espoused 
the  cause  of  Cornelius.  But  whether  it 
was,  that  he  had  entirely  changed  his  sen- 
timents on  the  subjects  in  dispute — which 
might  have  happened  through  the  influ- 
ence of  Novatian  as  his  superior  in  theo- 
retical theology,  or  from  his  own  violent 
disposition,  so  ready  to  go  from  one  ex- 
treme to  another — or  whether  he  only 
took  an  interest  in  one  object  of  conten- 
tion,* at  Rome  as  well  as  Carthage,  and 
that  he  was  from  disposition  constantly  a 
friend  to  the  party  in  opposition,  that  he 
was  inclined  to  join  that  party,  at  the  head 
of  ichich  there  was  no  bishop^  and  that 
Cornelius  was  hated  by  him  from  some 
other  grounds  ; — it  is  enough  for  us,  that 
Novatus  passionately  espoused  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  party  of  Novatian,  and  en- 
tered warmly  into  the  contest.  It  was 
his  mode  of  proceeding,  Avhelher  at  Rome 
or  at  Carthage,  to  be  the  moving  spring 
of  all  troubles,  and  yet  not  to  set  himself 
but  another,  at  the  head  of  the  party.  It 
might,  therefore,  be  in  consequence  of  his 
active  influence,  that  the  breach  grew  still 
wider,  and  that  the  honoured  Novatian 
was  obliged  to  take  the  lead,  and  assume 
the  rank  of  bishop. 

In  respect  to  those  who  had  fallen  away 
from  the  faith  during  the  Decian  persecu- 
tion, Cornelius  had  acted  according  to  the 
milder  principle,  and  had  admitted  many 
to  the  communion  of  the  Church,  who 
were,  at  least,  accused  by  the  other  party 
a.s  "  sacrificati."  Novatian,  and  his  ad- 
herents, made  this  a  subject  of  accusation 
against  him,  as  having  polluted  the  Church 


by  the  reception  of  unclean  persons  into 
it;  and  (after  the  usual  way  of  passionate 
controversialists)  as  on  the  one  hand,  Cor- 
nelius had  accused  Novatian  of  having 
made  all  this  stir  out  of  an  ambition 
which  thirsted  after  the  episcopal  office ; 

j  so  on  the  other,  a  part  at  least  of  the  fol- 
lowers of  Novatian,  imputed  the  mildness 

I  of  Cornelius  towards  other  men,  to  the 
circumstance  that  his  own  conscience 
accused  him  of  a  similar  offence,  for  he 
was  a  "  libellaticus."  Cyprian,  Ep.  lii. 
[Ep.  xlv.  ed.  Ox.]  Both  parties  endea- 
voured, as  is  usual  in  contentions  like 
these,  to  win  over  to  their  side  the  voice 
of  those  great  head  Churches  at  Alexan- 
dria, Antioch,  and  Carthage,  and  sent 
deputies  to  them.  The  zeal  for  the  strict- 
ness of  Church  discipline,  and  the  purity 
of  Christian  conduct,  which  Novatian 
showed,  and  the  weighty  influence  of  cer- 
tain confessors  who  were  at  first  in  con- 
nection with  him,  procured  him  access 
hither  and  thither,  and  even  a  bishop  of 
Antioch,  Fabius,  was  on  the  point  of  join- 
ing his  party.  Dionysius,  the  bishop  of 
Alexandria,  a  man  of  mild,  moderate,  and 
free  spirit,  was  from  the  beginning  an  op- 
ponent of  the  principles  of  Novatian,  but 
he  endeavoured  at  first  to  move  Novatian 
to  give  in,  by  means  of  friendly  persuasion. 
He  wrote  thus  in  reply  to  him  :*  "  If  thou 
art,  as  thou  sayest,  carried  away  against 
thy  will,  prove  it  by  retracting  of  your 
own  accord;  for  thou  oughtest  to  have  suf- 
fered any  thing,  rather  than  have  founded  a 
schism  in  the  Church.  And  a  martyrdom, 
in  order  to  avoid  a  schism,  would  not  be 
less  glorious  than  one  to  escape  offering 
to  idols,t  nay,  in  my  opinion,  it  would  be 
something  greater;  for  in  the  one  case  a 
man  becomes  a  martyr  for  the  sake  of  his 
own  soul ;  in  the  other,  he  does  so  for 
the  sake  of  the  whole  Church.  If,  there- 
fore, thou  wilt  now  persuade  or  constrain 
the  brethren  to  return  to  unanimity,  the 


*  Mosheim  defends  Novatus  against  the  accu- 
sation of  contradicting  himself,  by  supposing  that 
he  did  not  belong  to  the  five  presbyters,  and  that 
he  did  not  agree  with  them  and  with  Felicissimus 
in  this  respect,  but  only  in  a  common  opposition 
to  Cyprian.  But  the  proofs  cited  above  make 
against  this  supposition.  The  strongest  ground 
which  Mosheim  brings  forward  for  his  opinion  is 
this ; — that  Cyprian  who  raked  up  all  possible 
grounds  of  accusation  against  Novatus,  neverthe- 
less docs  not  charge  him  with  contradicting  him- 
self, when  he  had  a  capital  opportunity  of  doing  so. 
But  we  may,  perhaps,  imagine,  that  Cyprian  would 
be  tender  of  touching  on  this  point,  because  he 
might  fear  a  retort,  reminding  him  of  tlie  change 
in  liis  own  sentiments. 


*  Euseb.  vi.  45. 

"1"  [Km  iiv  oi/K  i^c^cT-s^ct  <n;  iviH.fr  tcu  f^n  a-^ia-au 
juaeru^iA,  KAr   \fAi  Si  x/u  fjLii^m. 

The  passage  stands  thus  in  the  edition  of  Read- 
ing, but  it  gives  then  no  reasonable  sense.  There 
is  a  note  from  Pearson  and  W.  Lowth,  recom- 
mending the  reading  fluo-ct/  instead  of  o-^ktm,  which 
the  translation  of  Rufinus  seems  to  support.  In 
the  elaborate  edition  of  Euseb.  H.  E.  just  pul)- 
lished  by  Heinichcn  (Lips.  1829),  he  has  adopted 
the  reading  supported  by  Stroth,  aJ^^oTi^-j.  tmc 
svBcsv  Tou  fxii  £!VaiAc\*T§)ia-a(  yiv.fxivni  li  svstfv  tm  fM 
<7)(j7cu  /xngTuefj.,  and  supposes  this  line  to  have 
l)ecn  omitted  in  Valesius  by  a  typographical  error. 
It  is  to  be  hoped  that  this  work  may  be  followed 
up  by  the  other  ecclesiastical  historians. — H.  J.  R. 


I.  NO  ABSOLUTION  FOR  PECCATA  MORTALIA. 


145 


good  thou  doest  by  this  means,  will  be 
greater  than  the  evil  thou  hast  caused. 
The  one  will  not  be  reckoned  to  thee ; 
but  the  other  will  be  praised;  even  if  thou 
art  unable  to  persuade  them,  and  fail  in 
tliy  purpose,  yet  at  any  rate  try  to  save 
thy  own  soul.  Mayest  thou  keep  peace 
in  the  Lord!  I  wish  thee  heartily  fare- 
well." But  as  Novatian  was  too  deeply 
rooted  in  his  opinions,  and  too  much 
occupied  by  his  polemic  zeal,  to  be  able 
to  listen  to  such  representations,  the  kind- 
hearted  Dionysius  now  declared  himself 
more  strongly  against  him,  and  endea- 
voured also  to  draw  away  others  from  his 
party.  He  accused  him*  of  bringing  for- 
ward the  most  unhallowed  doctrines  about 
God,  and  of  calumniating  the  merciful  Je- 
sus Christ  as  an  unmerciful  being. 

Novatian  might  have  better  hopes  of 
finding  support  in  North  Africa,  because 
Cyprian  himself  had  been  inclined,  in 
earlier  days,  to  principles  of  the  same  kind 
in  regard  to  penitence;  but  he  had,  in  the 
meantime,  as  we  above  remarked,  changed 
his  opinions  and  his  line  of  conduct,  on 
account  of  which  he  was  accused  of  in- 
consistency and  variableness,!  and  he  saw, 
ai  the  same  time,  in  Novatian,  the  disturber 
of  the  unity  of  the  Church,  a  man  who 
opposed  a  bishop  regularly  chosen,  ap- 
pointed by  God  himself,  and  one  who 
wished  to  prescribe  his  own  principles  to 
the  Church,  as  its  law. 

The  controversy  with  the  party  of  No- 
vatian turned  upon  two  general  points: — 

1.  On  the  principles  of  penitence. 

2.  On  what  constitutes  the  idea  and  the 
essence  of  a  true  Cliurch. 

In  regard  to  the  first,  Novatian  has  often 
been  unjustly  accused  of  maintaining  the 
following  doctrine:  No  one  who  has  vio- 
lated his  baptismal  covenant  by  a  sin,  can 
ever  obtain  again  the  pardon  of  his  sin,  he 
is  sure  of  eternal  condemnation,  hi  the 
first  place,  Novatian  never  maintained  that 
a  Christian  was  a  perfect  saint,  and  lie  was 
not  here  speaking  of  all  sins,  but  he  pre- 
supposed the  distinction  of"  peccata  mor- 
talia,"  and  "peccata  venialia,"  and  only 
spoke  of  the  former.  And  in  the  next 
place,  he  was  not  speaking  at  all  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  by  God,  but  only  of 
the  judgment  of  the  Church,  of  the  absolu- 
tion of  the  Church.  The  Church,  he 
meant  to  say,  has  no  riglu  to  give  absolu- 
tion to  a  man,  who,  by  a  mortal  sin,  has 


forfeited  the  forgiveness  of  sins  obtained 
by  Christ,  and  appropriated  to  him  in 
baptism.  God  has  revealed  no  determina- 
tion in  regard  to  such  men;  for  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  promised  in  the  Gospel, 
relates  only  to  sins  committed  before  bap- 
tism. These  fallen  brethren  must  certainly 
be  taken  care  of;  but  nothing  more  can  be 
done  for  them  than  to  exhort  them  to  re- 
pentance, and  commend  tliein  to  the  mercy 
of  God.  According  to  Socrates,  (iv.  28,) 
Novatian  wrote  thus : — "  We  must  not 
receive  the  '  sacrificati'  to  the  communion, 
but  only  exhort  thom  to  repentance,  and 
leave  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins  to  God 
I  alone,  who  has  the  power  to  forgive  sins." 
Even  Cyprian  supposes  these  to  be  the 
principles  of  Novatian,  although,  in  the 
heat  of  controversy,  he  did  not  always 
remember  it,  as  we  see  when  he  says, 
Ep.  lii.  (Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.,)  "Oh!  what 
mockery  of  the  deluded  brethren !  oh ! 
what  a  vain  deception  of  those  unhappy 
men,  who  are  lamenting!  to  exhort  them 
to  a  penitence  by  which  they  are  to  give 
satislkction  to  God — and  to  withdraw  from 
them  the  medicine,  which  might  give  them 
the  means  of  this  satisfaction  !  To  say  to 
your  brother  :  lament  and  shed  tears,  sigh 
day  and  night!  do  all  the  good  in  thy 
power,  to  wash  away  thy  sins,  but  after 
all,  thou  shalt  die  without  the  Church. 
Thou  must  do  the  things  pertaining  to 
peace,  but  the  peace  thou  seekest  thou 
shalt  never  attain  !*  Who  would  not  perish 
instantly?  Who  would  not  give  up  from 
mere  despair.^  Dost  thou  believe,  that  the 
husbandman  could  labour,  if  a  man  were 
to  say  to  him :  '  Spend  all  thy  care  and 
labour  on  the  culture  of  thy  field,  but  thou 
shalt  never  reap  an  harvest!'" 

As  we  see  from  the  above  quoted  ex- 
planation of  Novatian,  from  the  work  of 
Socrates,  at  first  the  controversy  regarded 
only  one  of  the  offences,  which  went  under 
the  name  of  "  peccata  mortalia ;"  they 
were  only  debating  about  the  conduct 
which  implied  a  denial  of  Christianity. 
On  the  supposition,  that  Novatian  was 
at  first  so  severe  on  this  kind  of  trans- 
gression, Cyprian  was  perfectly  justified 
in  combating  die  whole  moral  view, 
which  was  the  foundation  of  this  line  of 
conduct,  he  was  quite  justified  in  con- 
tending  against    the    notion,   that   only 


•   Euseb.  vii,  8. 

\  Ep.  lii.  (Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.)    "Nc  me  aliquis 
existiinet,  a  ptoposito  meo  leviter  reccssisse." 

19 


*  To  say  the  truth,  this  w<w  an  opinion  not 
quite  suited  to  Novatian,  whose  language  would 
rather  be:  "  Do  all  in  thy  power  to  attain  again  to 
thy  lost  peace  with  (lod ;  but  no  man  can  give 
you  a  certain  pkdge  that  you  have  attained  it." 
N 


146 


CHRISTIAN    CHARITY    OF    CYPRIAN. 


such  offences,  as  a  denial  of  God,  or 
a  denial  of  Christianity,  were  to  be  called 
offences  affainst  God,  as  if  every  sin  were 
not  an  offence  against  God,  and  a  prac- 
tical denial  of  God  and  Christianity  : 
'^Now  the  offence,"  says  Cyprian,  Ep. 
lii.  (Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.,)  "  of  the  adulterer 
and  deceiver,  is  far  worse  than  that  of 
the  'libellalicus;'  the  one  sins  by  com- 
pulsion, the  other  by  choice;  the  'li- 
bellaiicus'  is  deceived  by  the  notion, 
that   it    is    enough   not    to   have    sacri- 


He  puts  the  supposition,  that  many  of  the 
"libellatici,'  whose  conscience  did  not 
reprove  them,  would  be  led  away  by 
despair,  to  tear  tliemselves  away  from  the 
Church,  and  to  ask  for  admittance  into 
some  sect  of  heretics  :  and  he  says,  "  It 
will  be  laid  to  our  charge,  in  the  day  of 
judgment,  that  we  cared  not  for  the  sick 
sheep,  and  that  we  have  lost  many  healthy 
sheep  on  account  of  one  that  was  sick. 
While  the  Lord  left  the  ninety  and  nine 
whole  sheep  to  seek  that  which  was  wan- 


liced Adulterers  and   de-  dering  and  weary,  we,  it  would  seem,  not 

ceivers,  according  to  the  saying  of  the  ;  only  do  not  seek  the  lost  sheep,  but  when 
apostle,  (Ephes  v.  5,)  are  as  idolaters,  it  returns,  we  reject  it."  He  then  opposes 
For  as  our  bodies  are  members  of  Christ,  this  harshness  by  passages  from  the  writ- 
and  as  every  one  of  us  is  a  temple  of  j  ings  of  the  apostles,  1  Cor.  ix.  22 ;  xii. 
Christ,  he  Avho  injures  the  temple  of  126;  x.  33,  Stc;  and  he  adds,  "The  Case 
God  by  adultery,  injures  God;  and  he  j  stands  quite  differently  with  the  philoso- 
who  does  the  will  of  the  devil  in  Com-  '    " 


phers  and  stoics,  who  say,  that  all  sins 

offences    serves    the    devils   and  |  are  equal,  and   that  a  steadfast  man  must 

ot  easily  be  brought  to  bend.     But  there 

>  a   vast  difference   between  Christians 


mittni^ 

idols.    For  evil  works  came  not  from  the 

Holy  Spirit,  but  from  the  instigation  of 


the  adversary ;  and  evil  desires,  born  of  ■  and  philosophers We 

the  evil  spirit,  compel  men  to  act  against  j  must   avoid    what  comes  not   from    the 

God,  and  to  serve  the  devil."     But  after-  |  mercy  of  God,  but  from   the   presump- 

ards,  at  least,  the    party  of   Novatian  |  tion  of  cruel    philosophy. 


applied  their  principle  to  the  whole  class  } .  .  The  Lord  says  in  his  Gospel,  '  Be 
of  '  peccata  mortalia,'  which  most  pro-  j  ye  merciful,  even  as  your  Father  has 
bably  Novatian  himself  had  intended  from  mercy  on  you;'  and  again,  '  the  whole 
the  very  first,  although  the  immediate  I  have  not  need  of  a  physician,  but  they 
subject  of  controversy  led  him  only  to  j  that  are  sick.'  What  healing  can  he  per- 
speak  of  aiie  sort  of  "peccata  mortalia.'  form  who  says,  '  I  care  only  for  the  heal 
We  cannot  suppose  an  ascetic,  like  him-  i  ing  of  the  whol 
self,  to  be  very  much    inclined  to  treat !  no   physici 


of  those   who  need 
See !    there 


voluptuous  sins  too  mildly. 


lies  thy  brother,  wounded  by  the  enemy 


And  besides,  Novatian   in  the  extract  j  in  battle.     On  the  one  side,  Satan  endea- 
from  Socrates,  speaks  only  of  such  as  had  j  vours  to  kill  him,  whom  he  has  wounded; 


sacrificed.  Bui  if  Cyprian  does  not  mis- 
represent Novatian,  he  most  unjustly 
classed  together,  at  least  at  first,  all  who 
had  been  unfaithful,  in  any  way  whatever, 
during  the  persecution,  "  libellatici,"  as 
well  as  "  sacrificati,"  without  regard  to 
the  various  gradations  of  their  olFences, 
and  tlie  diflerent  circumstances  which 
accompanied  them  :  and  without  consid- 
ering that  so   many  among    the  "  libel- 


on  the  other,  Christ  exhorts  us  not  to 
allow  him  to  perish,  whom  He  has  re- 
deemed. To  which  of  these  two  do  we 
give  our  assistance  }  on  whose  side  are 
we  standing  .?  Do  we  further  the  devil's 
work,  and  allow  him  to  kill,  do  we  pass 
by  our  brother,  lying  half  dead,  like  the 
priest  and  the  Levite  in  the  Gospel  ?  or 
do  we,  like  priests  of  God  and  Ciirist, 
following  what  Christ  has  both  taught 
latici,"  were  guilty  of  an  error  and  a  mis-  1  and  done,  carry  off'  the  wounded  man 
understanding,  ratlier  than  of  a  sin,  he  i  from  the  fangs  of  his  adversary,  that  we 
utterly  refused  absolution  to  all  the  "  li- '•  may  reserve  hiiu  for  God's  final  judg- 
ment, when  we  have  done  what  we  can 
for  his  cure  .^"* 

Beautifully  and  truly  as  all  this  was 


bellatici"  as  well  as  to  the  "  sacrificati." 

Beautifully,  in  tlie  maimer  in  which 
Cyprian  combated  these  principles  of 
Novatian,*  does  the  paternal  and  loving 
heart  of  the  pious  shepherd,  who  fol 
lowed  the  example  of  iiis  Lord 
forth,  as  well  as  the  spirit  of  Christian 
love  and  tenderness  whicli  animated  him. 


Ep.  lii.  (Ep.  Iv.  ed.  Ox.) 


"  Ut  curatum  Deo  judici  reservemus,'  that  is 
peak  j  to  say,  upon  the  supposition  that  absolution  can- 
not  forestall  the  judgment  of  God,  but  only,  that, 
if  (iod,  who  looks  upon  the  inward  parts,  finds 
man's  heart  corresponding  to  this  absolution,  and 
fitted  for  it,  it  is  valid  at  God's  own  judgment- 
seat. 


II.    A   MIXED    CHURCH    NO    TRUE    CHURCH. 


14T 


said  against  the  spirit  of  Novatianism, ! 
yet  the  principles  of  Novalian  could  not 
be  met  and  contradicted  by  it.  Even 
Novatian  declared  that  the  fallen  breth- 
ren must  be  received  and  exhorted  to 
penitence.  He  also  acknowledged  the 
mercy  of  God  towards  sinners,  and  he 
^vould  also  allow  men  to  commend  these 
fallen  brethren  to  that  mercy,  but  he 
would  not  allow  men  again  with  cer- 
tainty to  announce  to  them  that  forgive- 
ness of  sins  which  they  had  once  for- 
feited, because  he  found  no  objective 
grounds  for  such  a  confidence.  The 
only  method  of  eflectually  answering 
him,  was  by  showing  him  such  an  ob- 
jective ground  of  contidence  for  all  sin- 
ners, namely,  in  the  merits  of  Christ, 
which  the  sinner  always  needed  only  to 
appropriate  to  himself,  by  penitence  unit- 
ed with  faith,  and  bv  a  tirm  reliance  on 
those  merits.  But  on  this  point  the  op- 
ponents of  Novatian  were  not  themselves 
explicit  enough,  because  in  opposing  his 
principles  they  sometimes  appealed  to 
1  John  i.  1,  2,  but  then  they  so  expressed 
themselves,  as  if  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
obtained  for  man  by  Christ,  only  related 
to  sins  committed  before  baptism,  and  as 
if  in  respect  to  sins,  committed  after  it, 
there  was  need  of  a  peculiar  and  per- 
sonal satisfaction  by  good  works.  Once 
lay  down  this  position,  and  Novatian 
was  ftiirly  entitled  to  ask,  '•'  And  who 
will  give  us  a  pledge  that  any  such  satis- 
faction is  available  V 

As  far  as  concerns  the  second  point*  in 
dispute,  the  notion  of  the  Church,  No- 
vatian held  the  following  opinion  :  As 
the  mark  of  purity  and  holiness  is  one  of 
the  essential  marks  of  a  true  Church, 
every  church  which,  neglecting  the  right 
use  of  Church  discipline,  suffers  those 
who  have  violated  their  baptismal  vow 
by  great  sins,  to  remain  in  the  midst  of 
her,  or  receives  them  into  her  again, 
ceases  thereby  to  be  a  true  Church,  and 
loses  all  the  rights  and  advantages  of 
such  a  Church.  The  Novatianists,  there- 
fore, as  they  claimed  to  be  the  only  un- 
stained, pure  Church,  called  themselves, 
ol  xa9a§oi,  "  the  pure."  Tt  was  justly  said, 
in  opposition  to  Novatian,  that  each  man 
could  be  answerable  and  punishable  only 


*  Pacianus,  of  Barcelona,  who  wrote  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  fourth  century,  shortly  com- 
prises the  two  principles  of  ISovatian  in  the  fol- 
lowing words ;  "  Quod  mortale  peccatum  ec- 
clesia  donare  non  possit,  iinmo  quod  ipsa  pereat 
recipicndo  peccantcs."  Ep.  iii.  contra.  Nova- 
tian. Galland.  Bibi.  Patr.  t.  vii. 


for  his  own  sins,  and  no  man  for  those 
of  another,  in  Mhich  he  had  no  share  ; 
I  that  only  the  inward  conmiunion  widi 
sinners,  by  the  dispositions  of  the  heart, 
not  the  outward  association  with  them, 
was  deriling  in  its  nature  ;  and  that  it  was 
a  piece  of  arrogance  and  human  pride,  to 
wish  to  exercise  that  judicial  power  of 
separating  the  real  and  false  members  of 
the  Christian  Church,  which  the  Lord 
had  reserved  to  himself  Beautifully  does 
Cyprian  say  on  this  subject,  "  Although 
there  appear  to  be  tares  in  the  Church, 
let  not  this  disturb  our  faith  nor  our 
charity,  so  as  to  induce  us  to  leave  the 
Church,  because  there  are  tares  in  the 
Church.  We  must  labour  to  belong  to  the 
wheat,  that,  when  the  wheat  is  gathered 
into  the  garners  of  the  Lord,  we  may 
receive  the  recompense  of  our  labours. 
The  Aposde  says,  'in  a  great  house, 
there  are  not  only  vessels  of  silver  and 
gold,  but  vessels  of  wood  and  clay,  and 
some  to  dishonour,  some  also  to  honour.' 
Let  us,  therefore,  labour,  as  far  as  we  are 
al)le,  to  be  those  golden  or  silver  vessels. 
To  destroy  the  vessels  of  clay,  is  only 
given  to  the  Lord  alone,  to  whom  the 
rod  of  iron  has  been  given  also.  The 
servant  cannot  be  greater  than  his  Master, 
and  no  one  can  appropriate  to  himself 
what  the  father  has  given  only  to  his 
Son,  namely,  to  believe  himself  capable 
of  carrying  the  winnowing  fan,  to  cleanse 
and  purify  the  threshing-floor,  or  of  sepa- 
rating the  tares  from  the  wheat."* 

But  here,  again,  men  were  unable  to 
fmd  the  only  direct  argument  to  oppose 
Novatianism  on  this  point,  and  the  ene- 
mies of  Novatian  were,  in  fact,  in  the 
same  fundamental  error  with  himself, 
only  that  they  dilTered  in  the  application 
of  their  principle.  That  error  was  a  con- 
fusion between  the  ideas  of  the  visible  and 
of  the  invisible  Church;  and  from  this 
error  it  was  that  Novatian,  while  he  trans- 
ferred the  attribute  of  purity  and  unstained 
holiness,  which  belongs  to  the  invisible 
Church,  the  communion  of  saints,  as  such 
(see  Ephes.  v.  27),  to  the  visible  form  of 
the  invisible  Church,  drew  the  conclusion, 
that  every  Church,  which  has  unclean 
members  in  it,  ceases  to  be  a  true  Church. 
Of  the  invisible  Cliurch  alone  could  he 
maintain,  and  that  justly  too,  that  she 
would  belie  her  nature,  and  lose  her  marks 


*  [Dr.  Neander  has  made  no  reference  here  to 
Qyprian.  The  passage  to  which  this  quotation 
appears  to  approach  the  nearest,  is  in  Ep.  Iv.  p. 
H2,ed.  Ox.— H.  J.  R.1 


148 


CYPRIAN  AND  NOVATIAN  UNDER  THE  SAME  ERROR. 


and  her  rights,  if  she  admitted  false  mem- 
bers into  her;  but  this  would  be  a  false 
conclusion  if  it  were  applied  to  the  visible 
Church,  in  wliich  the  members  of  the  in- 
visible Church,  who  are  united  by  the 
bond  of  the  Spirit,  lie  scaltered.  It  was  a 
confusion  of  outward  and  inward,  when 
he  maintained,  that  men  became  them- 
selves unclean  by  mere  outward  society, 
in  the  same  outward  communion  of  the 
Church,  with  the  unclean.  But  the  ad- 
versaries of  Novatian  were  unable  to  dis- 
cover this  fundamental  error,  from  which 
all  the  other  single  ones  proceeded,  be- 
cause they  were  themselves  the  slaves  of 
the  very  same  error.  Instead  of  appeal- 
ing to  an  entirely  difterent  application  of 
the  idea  of  the  Church,  Cyprian  contents 
himself  with  opposing  Novatian  only  by 
bringing  forward  a  twofold  condition  of 
the  Church — one,  her  condition  here  be- 
low; the  other,  her  condition  in  glory, 
after  that  separation  has  been  completed 
by  the  last  judgment.  As  Cyprian  him- 
self was  entangled  by  tlie  same  error  of 
confusing  the  outward  with  the  inward, 
it  liappened  also  that  he  himself,  on  an 
after-occasion,  where  he  had  not  the  con- 


troversy against  Novatianism  before  his 
eyes,  came  very  close  to  the  principles  of 
Novatian ;  this  was  in  Ep.  Ixviii.  [Ep.  Ixvii. 
ed.  Ox.,]  where  he  declared  to  tlie  Spanish 
bishops,  that  they  were  themselves  defiled 
by  suffering  unworthy  priests  among  them, 
and  that  those  who  remained  in  connec- 
tion with  sinners,  became  themselves  par- 
takers of  their  sins.*  Here  Cyprian,  not 
distinguishing  mere  outward  communion 
from  inward  communion  of  feelings,  has 
expressed  himself  indistinctly,  and  with 
only  half  truth."!" 

From  this  contention  also,  the  Catholic 
system  of  the  Church,  firmly  established, 
and  thoroughly  compact  in  all  its  parts, 
came  forth  victorious,  and  the  Novatian- 
ists  extended  themselves,  in  later  centu- 
ries, only  as  a  small  separate  sect. 


*  Consortes  et  participes  alienorum  delictonim 
fieri,  qui  fuerint  delinquenlibus  copulati. 

j-  [Mosheim,  in  his  hook  de  Rebus  Christiano- 
ruin  ante  Constantinum,  has  treated  the  contro- 
versies about  Novatus,  Novatian,  and  Stephanus, 
very  fully.  Stec.  iii.  §  11 — 17.  His  views  nearly 
coincide  with  those  brought  forward  here. — 
H.  J.  R.] 


THE    AUTHOR'S    PREFACE 


SECOND   PART.* 


To  the  readers,  who  have  given  to  the  first  half  of  the  first  volume  of  my  Church 
History  such  a  reception,  as  makes  me  still  more  responsible  to  them,  as  an  author;  I 
here  communicate  the  continuation  of  my  work.  On  the  object  at  which  I  have  aimed 
in  treating  the  History  of  the  Church  I  need  not  add  any  thing  further,  after  what  I  have 
slated  in  the  preface  to  the  first  part;  to  him,  who  finds  himself  on  too  opposite  a  posi- 
tion, in  regard  to  knowledge  and  to  life,  to  be  able  or  willing  to  understand  what  is  here 
advanced,  I  cannot  expect  to  make  myself  intelligible  by  further  explanation;  our  dis- 
agreement is  unavoidable.  Even  with  regard  to  those  readers,  for  whom  I  have  written, 
I  need  not  express  more  fully  my  gratitude  to  them.  The  word  which  comes /row  the 
heart  and  the  spirit,  finds,  as  it  can,  without  further  preface,  its  way  to  the  heart  and 
spirit;  discourse  must  find  its  own  hearers,  and  writings  their  own  readers,^  nothing 
further  can  be  done  to  recommend  and  attract. 

I  feel  only  that  it  is  a  duty  to  add  a  word  on  one  subject;  viz.  the  extent  to  which 
this  volume  has  proceeded,  which  may  appear  disproportionate  to  many.  It  was  from 
the  beginning  my  plan  to  treat  the  History  of  the  Church  in  the  three  first  centuries  at 
great  length,  because  this  period  appeared  to  me  the  most  weighty  for  every  Christian 
and  every  theologian;  because  I  believed  that  the  establishment  and  the  propagation  of 
just  and  unprejudiced  views  on  the  composition  of  the  Christian  Church,  on  Christian 
worship,  on  Christian  life,  and  Christian  doctrines,  would  be  particularly  important  and 
salutary,  both  in  a  general  point  of  view,  and  in  particular  for  our  times  in  opposition  to 
different  kinds  of  errors  now  in  circulation  from  many  different  quarters.  The  fermen- 
tation which  the  appearance  of  Christianity  produced  in  the  moral,  religious,  and  intel- 
lectual nature  of  mankind,  is  of  particular  service  in  directing  attention  to  the  peculiar 
nature  of  the  Gospel  in  the  greatest  number  of  different  points  of  view,J  and  therefore, 
this  extraordinary  object  certainly  requires  and  deserves  consideration  in  the  greatest 
number  of  lights.  We  recognise  here  the  different  directions  of  the  human  mind  and 
spirit,  which  are  repeated  in  following  periods,  often  only  under  other  forms,  and  often 
in  a  less  free  and  original  manner.  When  these  foundations  of  the  whole  History  of 
the  Church,  are  more  fully  developed,  in  the  following  centuries  much  may  be  presup- 
posed and  handled  in  a  shorter  and  more  compressed  manner.     The  history  of  the  sects 


*  This  preface  belongs  to  the  second  of  the  three  brochures  in  which  this  first  portion  of  the  His- 
tory of  the  Church  was  written.     It  contains  Sections  iii.  and  iv. 

+  Dax  Wort  muss  sich  seine  Borer  und  die  Schrift.  ihre  Leser  selhsf  snchen.  This  seems  to  be 
a  proverbial  phrase,  especially  a,s  it  is  printed  in  what  are  equivalent  to  our  italics. 

X  The  literal  translation  would  here  be  '  ii^the  most  many-sided  manner ;'  and  '  the  most  many- 
sided  consideration. ' 


N  2  149 


cI  AUTHOR  S    PREFACE. 

of  ihis  period, in  which  the  differences  and  contradictions  proceed  from  the  inmost 

depth  of  the  human  spirit  and  heart,  and,  being  as  yet  uncontrolled  and  forcibly  re- 
pressed by  the  deadening  influence  of  a  court,  and  State  Church,  can  develope  them- 
selves with  more  breadth  and  freedom — is  so  much  the  more  interesting  and  instructive 
than  the  doctrinal  controversies  of  the  Oriental  Church  in  the  succeeding  centuries, 
which  often  lose  themselves  in  dry  dialectics,  and  are  often  debased  by  the  mixture  of 
the  miserable  elements  of  the  party- squabbles  of  the  Byzantine  court. 

These  and  similar  grounds  induced  me  to  treat  this  first  volume  of  the  Church  His- 
tory with  greater  fulness,  and  we  are,  therefore,  by  no  means  to  reckon  the  number  of 
volumes  likely  to  follow  upon  the  same  scale.  The  third  part,  which  is  about  to  appear 
D.  v.,  at  Easter  next,  will  contain  the  conclusion  of  the  first  volume,  and,  if  possible,  the 
representation  of  the  Apostolic  age,  of  which  I  spoke  in  the  preface  to  the  first  part.  I 
must  request  the  learned  reader  to  suspend  his  judgment  on  the  arra.ngement  of  the 
whole  to  the  conclusion  of  the  first  volume. 

A.  Neander. 


151 


SECTION   III. 


CHRISTIAN    LIFE    AND    WORSHIP. 


(1.)   Christian  Life. 


Ever  since  Christianity  has  been  intro- 
duced as  an  element  of  human  nature,  it 
has  acted  in  all  cases,  where  it  has  taken 
root,  with  the  same  Divine  sanctifying 
power;  and  wretched  would  be  the  state 
of  the  Church  if  this  Divine  power  were 
liable  to  become  extinct  by  the  lapse  of 
ages.  In  regard  to  the  sanctifying  power 
which  resides  in  the  Gospel,  this  period, 
therefore,  in  which  Christianity  first  ap- 
peared to  work  on  human  nature,  could 
have  no  advantages  over  the  succeeding 
ages  of  the  Christian  Church.  The  only 
difference  between  the  first  ages  of  the 
Church  and  the  succeeding  centuries,  was, 
that  men,  who  in  these  early  days  turned 
from  die  sinful  service  of  paganism  to 
Christianity,  felt  the  power  of  Christianity 
to  form  and  reform  man's  nature  more 
deeply,  by  comparing  what  they  had  been 
and  what  they  were,  and  that  this  change 
of  life,  which  had  taken  place  in  them, 
was  more  conspicuous  to  the  rest  of  the 
world :  as  the  aposde  St.  Paul,  in  writing 
to  Christians  converted  from  heathenism, 
reminds  them  of  what  they  once  were — that 
they  once  walked  after  the  course  of  this 
world,  after  the  spirit  who  hath  his  work 
in  the  children  of  unbelief — and  as  he, 
after  relating  the  prevailing  crimes  of  the 
corrupted  heathen  world,  says  to  them, 
"And  such  were  some  of  you,  but  ye  are 
waslied,  but  ye  are  sanctified,  but  ye  are 
justified  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 
(1  Cor.  vi.  11.)  The  church-teachers, 
who  had  previously  been  heathens,  often 
appealed  to  these  effects,  which  they  had 
experienced  in  their  own  case.  The  lan- 
guage of  Cyprian,*  in  the  first  warmth  of 
feeling,  after  his  conversion,  is  to  this  ef- 
fect: "  Hear  that  which  is  felt  before  it  is 
learnt,  that  which  is  not  collected  together 
by  long  study,  but  which  is  received  in  a 
moment  by  the  power  of  grace,  which 
hastens  its  work.  While  I  lay  in  dark- 
ness and  in  blind  night,  and  while  I  was 
driven  about  with  uncertain  and  wander- 
ing feet  by  the  waves  of  the  world,  doubt- 
ful of  the  conduct  of  my  life,  a  stranger  to 


*  AdDonat 


truth  and  liglit,  that  which  the  Divine 
mercy  promised  for  my  salvation,  seemed 
to  me,  after  my  then  way  of  thinking, 
something  altogether  hard  and  difiicult, 
that  a  man  should  be  born  again,  and  lay- 
ing aside  what  he  had  once  been,  the 
whole  corporeal  frame  still  remaining  the 
same,  should  become  in  soul  and  mind  an 
entirely  different  man.  How,  said  I,  is  so 
great  a  change  possible,  that  what  has  so 
long  taken  root,  should  at  once  be  done 
away.  ....  As  I  was  bound  and 
entangled  by  the  errors  of  my  former  life, 
from  which  I  believed  that  there  could  be 
no  deliverance,  so  I  gave  myself  up  to  the 
vices  which  beset  me,  and  while  I  des- 
paired of  amendment,  I  encouraged  my 
evil  dispositions  as  if  they  had  been  a  part 
of  myself.  But  when,  the  water  of  regen- 
eration having  washed  away  the  stains  of 
my  former  life,  the  light  from  above  shed 
itself  into  a  heart  freed  from  guilt,  and 
purified,  when  the  Spirit  from  heaven  had 
been  breathed  into  me,  and  formed  me  by 
a  second  birth  into  a  new  man,  then  most 
wonderfully  that  became  certain  to  me, 
which  had  been  doubtful  before  ;  that  was 
open  which  had  been  closed ;  that  was 
light  where  I  had  before  seen  only  dark- 
ness ;  that  became  easy  whicli  had  been  dif- 
ficult ;  that  became  practicable  which  be- 
fore had  seemed  impossible  ;  so  that  I  can 
now  perceive  that  the  life  I  led,  when  be- 
ing born  after  the  flesh  I  lived  subject  to 
sin,  was  a  worldly  life  ;  but  the  life  which 
I  have  now  begun  to  lead,  is  the  begin- 
ning of  a  life  proceeding  from  God,  a  life 
animated  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  From  God,  I  say,  from  God  is  all 
our  might,  from  Him  we  receive  life  and 
power."  Justin  Martyr  paints  the  change 
which  took  place  in  Christians  thus:* 
"  we  who  once  delighted  in  debauchery, 
now  love  only  purity;  we  who  once  used 
magic  arts,  have  now  consecrated  our- 
selves to  the  good  and  unbegotten  God ; 
we  who  once  loved  gain  beyond  all  things, 
now  give  up  to  the  common  use  even 
what  we  have,  and  share  it  with  every 


•  Apolog.  ii.  c.  17.    [Apol.  i.  p.  20.  ed.  Thirlb. 
-H.  J.  R.] 


152 


CHRISTIANITY    AND    HEATHENISM    CONTRASTED. 


one  that  has  need;  we  who  once  hated j  custom  which  makes  men   cleave    to   a 


and  murdered  one  another,  we  who  would 
not  enjoy  the  hearth  in  common  with 
strangers  on  account  of  the  difference  of 
our  customs,  now  live  in  common  with 
them,  since  the  appearance  of  Christ:  we 
pray  for  our  enemies,  we  seek  to  persuade 
those  wlio  liate  us  unjustly,  that  they 
mav  direct  their  lives  according  to  the 
o-lorious  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  may  share 
with  us  the  joyful  hope  of  enjoying  the 
same  privileges  from  God,  the  Lord  of  all 
things."  Origen*  says,  ''The  work  of 
Jesus  Christ  is  shown  in  the  whole  world, 
where  the  Churches  of  God  founded  by 
Christ,  and  consisting  of  men  reformed 
from  a  thousand  crimes,  exist;  and  the 
name  of  Jesus  still  further  has  a  wonder- 
ful efficacy  in  introducing  mildness,  de- 
cency of  manners,  humanity,  goodness 
and  gendeness  among  those  who  embrace 
the  belief  of  the  doctrine  of  God  and 
Christ,  and  of  a  judgment  to  come,  not 
for  any  worldly  advantage  nor  purpose, 
but  honestly  and  uprightly ."| 

As  the  contrast  of  heathenism  and 
Christianity,  which  is  no  other  than  that 
between  the  old  and  the  new  man,  was 
so  strongly  marked  in  the  different  pe- 
riods of  the  lives  of  individuals,  so  was 
it  also  with  regard  to  the  relation  be- 
tween Christians,  considered  collectively, 
and  the  corrupt  heathen  world  in  which, 
after  the  flesh,  they  still  lived,  and  from 
out  of  which,  after  the  spirit,  they  were 
already  departed.  Although  in  later  times 
the  world,  still  heathenish  in  disposition 
and  feelings,  had  put  on  the  garb  of 
Christianity,  and  it  was  difficult  to  dis- 
tinguish the  few  genuine  and  upright 
Christians  from  the  general  mass  of  nom- 
inal ones,  yet  at  this  earlier  period  hea- 
thenism stood  forth  in  all  its  naked  de- 
formity, the  prevailing  party  in  the  world, 
in  distinct  opposition  to  Christianity.  To 
this  contrast  Origen  appeals  when  he  says, 
"Compared  with  the  communities  of  the 
people  among  whom  they  are  placed,  the 
communities  of  Christians  are  as  lights 
in  the  world."J 

Whatever  inducements  there  may  have 
been  in  later  times  to  a  mere  outward 
Christianity  —  the  external  advantages 
connected  with  the  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity, as  the  religion  of  the  state,  and 


•  Contra  Cels.  Lib.  i.  §  67.  [(p.  53.  ed.  Spen- 
cer.) This  quotation  is  abridged  from  the  original. 
— H.  J.  R. 

j"  'F.I'  TO(c  fJi-M  ii^  Ta  ^lanTUta. « Ttvom  X^U'.t';  JvS^aiT/xac 
vTroufivofjiitoi;, 

i  Contra  Cels.  Lib.  iii.  c.  29.  [p.  138,  ed.  Spen.] 


religion  inlierited  from  their  ancestors, 
without  any  peculiar  inward  call  and 
feelings  in  their  own  case — all  these  in 
this  period  (especially  in  the  first  half  of 
it)  had  no  existence.  The  greater  num- 
ber of  converts  in  these  days  was  from 
a  religion  which  education,  the  reverence 
for  antiquity,  the  power  of  custom,  and 
the  external  advantages  united  to  its  ob- 
servance recommended  to  them,  and  it 
was  a  conversion  to  a  religion  which 
had  every  thing  against  it,  which  the 
other  had  in  its  favour,  and  which  from 
the  very  first  required  many  sacrifices 
from  its  converts,  and  set  before  them 
many  dangers  and  sufferings. 

And  yet  we  should  altogether  mistake 
the  essential  qualities  of  mmi's  nature 
which,  in  its  relation  to  Christianity,  is 
always  the  same,  we  should  altogether 
mistake  the  nature  of  Christianity,  which 
uses  no  magical  means  to  work  on  man's 
vvill  to  attract  and  reform  him,  and  we 
should  also  mistake  the  nature  of  this 
age,  if  we  expected  to  find,  in  any  point 
during  this  period,  a  time  when  the 
Church  consisted,  I  will  not  say  of  per- 
fect saints,  for  there  are  none  of  these  on 
earth,  but  wholly  of  genuine  Christians, 
animated  entirely  by  pure  Christianity,  or 
fliith  working  by  love.  Although  the  in- 
ducements to  an  hypocritical  profession 
of  Christianity  were  fewer,  yet  they  were 
not  wholly  wanting.  The  support  which 
the  poor  received  in  Christian  communi- 
ties, may,  perhaps,  have  proved  a  means 
of  attraction  to  many,  who  had  no  reli- 
gious interest  in  the  matter ;  and  there  is 
a  hint  to  this  effect  in  the  above  cited 
passage  of  Origen,  where  he  says,  that 
the  name  of  Christ  can  show  its  Divine 
efficacy  only  among  those,  who  do  not 
feign  their  belief  from  human  motives. 

But  without  considering  these  feigned 
Christians,  yet  even  among  those,  in 
whose  hearts  the  seed  of  the  Gospel  had 
really  fallen,  our  Lord's  parable  of  the 
sow-er  must  often  have  proved  itself  true. 
This  seed  could  not  find,  in  every  heart 
into  which  it  fell,  the  ground  fitted  for  its 
reception,  the  ground  in  which  it  could 
spring  up  as  it  ought,  and  bring  forth 
fruit.  It  might  well  happen  in  this  age, 
as  in  every  otlier,  that  men,  who  were  for 
a  moment  touched  by  the  power  of  truth, 
might  not  use  these  impressions  as  they 
ought,  might  become  faithless  to  tlie  truth, 
and  instead  of  consecrating  to  it  their 
whole  life,  might  wish  to  serve  God  and 
the  world  at  the  same  time,  and  thence, 


FALSE    SELF-CONFIDENCE. 


at  length,  again  be  completely  enslaved 
by  the  world.     He  who  did  not  watch 
over   his    own  heart,  who  did  not  con- 
stantly with  tear  and  trembling,    endea- 
vour, in  his  inward  being  under  the  gui- 
dance  of  the  Divine  Spirit,   to  separate 
that   which    is    of  the  Spirit   from    that 
which  is  of  the  world,  was  exposed  to 
the  same  sources  of  self-deception,  and 
thence  to  the  same  danger  of  falling  as  in 
other  times.    Some  sources  of  self-decep- 
tion, to    which,   in  fact,   ultimately,  all  , 
others  are  to  be  referred,  are  grounded  in 
human  nature  itself;  and  these  only  show  I 
themselves  in  a  dilferent  manner   under  j 
different  relations,  and  attach  themselves,  1 
sometimes  on  one  set  of  outward  circum- 
stances, sometimes  on  another ;    others,  | 
again,  are  peculiar  to  different  centuries,  I 
and,  indeed,   all  external    circumstances,  I 
however   desirable,  considered  in  them-  i 
selves  alone,  they  may  be  for  man,  may,  [ 
if  true  light  be  not  shed  on  liis  inward 
heart,  and  he  watch  not  over  himself,  be- 
come means  of  self-delusion  to  him.     It 
cannot   be    unconditionally  declared   of 
any  circumstances   or  condition,  consid- 
ered abstractedly,  that  hj  them  vital  Chris- 
tianity must  he  furthered  ;  all  depends 
constantly  on  the  tendency  of  man\s  own 
will,  to  which  the  use  or  misuse  of  these 
circumstances    is    entrusted.     The    very 
same  circumstances  wliich  further  Chris- 
tianity   in    one    man,  may,   if  tliey  are 
not  used  as  they   ought   to  be,  become 
the  cause  of  stumbling  in  the  case  of  an-  i 
other.  [ 

The  striking  opposition  between  Chris-  ' 
tianity  and   the    heathenism  which   was  ' 
then  the  prevailing  rule  of  life,  between  t 
the  Christian  Church  and  the  world,  pre-  I 
served  the  Christians  from  many  of  those 
intermixtures  between  the  Church  and  the 
world,    between    spiritual    and    worldl)-  [ 
things,  which  became  so  common  in  later 
days;  but   to  many,  who  did   not  view 
this  opposition  in  the  proper  light,  it  be- 
came a  source  of  dangerous  self-delusion. 
When  they  had  sternly  renounced  every 
thing  which  externally  came  to  them  in  a 
heathen  shape ;  when  they  had  outwardly 
renounced  the  service  of  heathen  supersti- 
tion and  heathen  profligacy,  they  believed 
that  they  had  doneenougli;  and  so,  while 
they  made  of  this  outward  renunciation  a 
kind  of  opus  operafum,  which  served  to 
cherish  and  support  a  pride,  which  was 
utterly  a  stranger  to  the  spirit  of  love,  and 
a  false  confidence,  they   overlooked,  on 
that  account,  tlie  still  more  severe  struggle 
20 


153 


with  the  spirit  of  heathenism  within  them, 
the  manifold  springs  of  selfishness  and  of 
a  more  refined  love  of  the  world,  which 
are  the  more  dangerous,  because  they  are 
more  concealed,  and  because  they  come 
in  the  shape  of  a  friend.  The  plain  and 
open  contrast  between  Christianity  and 
heathenism,  the  Church  and  the  world, 
might  mislead  many  into  priding  them- 
selves, after  a  fleshly  manner,  on  their  su- 
periority over  the  heathen ;  as  if,  by  the 
mere  outward  profession  of  the  faith,  and 
the  habitual  use  of  the  outward  observ- 
ances of  Christianity,  they  were  raised  far 
above  the  heathen,  as  servants  of  Satan, 
and  might  fairly  consider  themselves 
already  citizens  of  that  heavenly  kingdom, 
from  which  the  heathen  were  excluded. 
And  even  among  those  who  made  being  a 
Christian  no  opus  operatum,  but  who 
justly  estimated  the  requirements  of  this 
calling,  and  seriously  strove  to  fulfil  them, 
there  was  still  a  source  of  danger  in  the 
violence  of  spiritual  pride  and  bitter  en- 
mity, with  which  they  regarded  the  hea- 
then, because  it  gave  room  in  their  hearts 
for  other  feelings  than  those  of  humility 
and  thankfulness,  arising  from  the  con- 
sciousness that  they  once  lay  in  tlie  same 
corruption,  and  the  same  spiritual  death 
as  their  heathen  brethren,  from  which  tlie 
grace  of  God  had  now  delivered  them; 
and  other  feelings  than  those  impulses  of 
love  which  would  urge  them  to  endeavour 
to  lead  their  still  unhappy  brethren,  with 
whom  they  were  connected  by  so  many 
ties  of  nature,  and  for  whom  Christ  had 
also  died,  into  that  blessedness  which  had 
been  bestowed  on  themselves  by  the  grace 
of  God.  When  once  such  feelings  had 
been  taken  up,  how  easily  would  they 
find  means  of  making  their  way  among 
men,  who  were  still  living  in  the  flesh, 
and  of  extending  themselves  widely  ! 

The  outward  fight  against  the  world, 
which  reminded  the  Christians  of  their 
calling  to  battle  (as  milites  Dei  et  Christi,) 
might  serve  to  awaken  their  faith  and 
Christian  virtue ;  but  this  very  fight  also, 
if  the  inclinations  of  the  old  man  were  not 
constantly  repressed  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  ardour  of  love,  might 
generate  and  maintain  a  certain  gloomy 
and  austere  temper,  utterly  repugnant  to 
that  spirit  of  love  and  friendship,  which 
the  apostle  names  aiuong  the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit,  and  calls  ^^na-rorrn.  In  the  out- 
ward battle  the  inward  might  be  forgotten, 
and  the  victory  in  it,  as  we  have  often 
had  occasion  to  remark,  might  become 


154 


FALSE    RELIANCE    ON    BAPTISM    COMBATED. 


the  means  of  cherishing  pride,  false  con- 
fidence, and  fleshly  security. 

Many,  however,  were  induced,  by  the 
consciousness  of  sin,  to  seek  I'orgiveness, 
and  ttiis  want  led  them  to  Christianity ; 
but  they  could  not  resolve  to  give  to  the 
Gospel  that  sacrifice  of  the  heart  which 
it  requires,  and  without  which  none  of  its 
blessed,  sanctifying,  and  happy  influence 
can  be  revealed.  They  conceived  the 
(h)Ctrine  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  of 
grace  in  a  fleshly  manner,  pressing  Chris- 
tianity into  the  service  of  their  fleshly 
imaginations,  and  so  they  wished  to  have 
forgiveness  of  their  sins  without  leaving 
the  practice  of  them,  a  fancy  against  which 
St.  Paul  so  often  had  warned  mankind,  as 
when  he  said,  "  Shall  we  then  continue  in 
sin,  that  grace  may  abound  ?  God  forbid  ! 
How  shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin,  live 
any  longer  therein  ?"  They  transferred 
their  heathenish  notion  of  the  magical 
power  of  lustrations  to  baptism,  and  they 
thought  that  by  it  they  should  receive  at 
once,  without  the  proper  preparation  in 
the  heart,  a  magical  extinction  of  sin,  so 
that  under  this  idea  they  delayed  their 
baptism,  and  in  the  mean  time  gave  them- 
selves up  to  their  lusts.  The  teachers  of 
the  Christian  Church  set  themselves 
heartily  to  work,  to  combat  his  notion, 
'i'ertullian  says  against  it,  in  his  book  on 
Ilepentance,  ch.  vi.,  "How  foolish  and 
liow  wicked  is  it,  not  to  fulfil  the  duty  of 
repentance,  and  yet  to  expect  pardon  for 
sin !  it  is  exactly  this,  not  to  pay  the 
price  and  yet  to  stretch  the  hand  out  for 
the  goods,  for  this  is  the  price  at  which 

God  has  set  the  pardon  for  sin 

As,  therefore,  those  who  sell  any  thing, 
examine  first  the  money  for  which  they 
have  agreed,  to  see  that  it  be  neither 
scraped  nor  worn,  nor  counterfeit;  so  we 
suj)pose  also  that  the  Lord  makes  trial 
beforehand  of  our  repentance,  when  he  is 
about  to  give  us  so  valuable  a  possession 
as  eternal  life.  .  .  .  The  divine  grace, 
that  is,  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  remains  un- 
impaired for  those  who  are  to  be  baptized ; 
but  then  they  must  perform  their  part,  so 
as  to  become  capable  of  receiving  it.  .  ,  . 
You  may,  indeed,  easily  steal  into  bap- 
tism, and  by  your  protestations  deceive 
those,  whose  business  it  is,  into  adminis- 
tering the  rite  to  you.  But  God  watches 
over  his  treasure,  and  will  not  allow  the 
unworthy  to  steal  into  it.  .  .  .  Envelope 
yourself  in  whatever  darkness  you  may, 
God  is  light.  But  many  think  that  God 
is  bound  to  keep  whatever  he  has  pro- 


mised, even  with  those  who  are  unworthy 
of  it,  and  they  bind  his  free  grace  in  terms 
of  slavery."*  Tertullian  justly  appeals  to 
experience,  which  shows,  that  in  those 
who  come  in  such  a  spirit  to  baptism,  the 
effects  of  Christianity  could  not  be  shown, 
and  that  they  often  fell  away  again,  inas- 
much as  they  built  their  house  upon  the 
sand.  Against  such  persons,  Origen 
argues  that  the  benefits  of  baptism  wholly 
depend  on  the  hearts  of  those  who  receive 
it,  and  are  only  bestowed  on  those  who 
come  to  it  in  a  true  spirit  of  penitence ; 
but,  on  tlie  contrary,  that  to  those  with 
whom  this  spirit  is  wanting,  baptism  only 
tends  to  condemnation ;  and  therefore, 
that  the  spirit  of  renovation,  which  ac- 
companies baptism,  is  not  bestowed  upon 
all.j  In  order  to  guard  against  the  notions 
of  such  unreal  Christians,  in  Cyprian's 
Collection  of  Testimonies  for  the  Laity, 
after  he  has  laid  down  the  position  that 
no  one  can  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  God, 
unless  he  has  been  baptized  and  born 
again,  he  adds, "  And  yet  it  is  but  of  litde 
use  that  a  man  should  be  baptised  and  re- 
ceive the  sacrament,  unless  he  shows 
himself  bettered  in  conduct  and  in  his 
works  :"J  and  the  passages  of  the  New 
Testament  which  he  adduces,  are  well 
calculated  to  show  the  worthlessness  of 
such  a  mere  nominal  Christianity  :  1  Cor. 
ix.  24.  Matt.  iii.  10;  v.  16;  vii.  22. 
Philip,  ii.  15 ;  and  then  he  also  says, 
"  He  that  is  baptized,  may  also  lose  the 
grace  that  he  has  received,  if  he  remains 
not  in  a  state  of  purity  from  sin."  And 
he  cites  in  proof  the  following  passages  of 
the  Bible:  John  v.  14.  1  Cor.  iii.  17. 
2  Chron.  xv.  3. 

It  must  certainly  be  acknowledged,  that 
however  earnestly  the  teachers  of  the 
Church  combated  a  notion  so  prejudicial 
to  the  Christian  life,  yet  the  partially  in- 
jurious consequences  of  that  interchange 
of  outward  and  inward  things,  are  to  be 
traced  in  the  doctrines  about  the  Church 
and  sacraments ;  and  it  was  here  that  this 
notion  would  find  support,  and  something 
to  attach  itself  to.  It  is,  on  this  account, 
of  great  practical  importance,  that  the  doc- 


*  Exactly  like  those  Jews,  so  full  of  fleshly 
pride,  whom  St.  Paul  combats  in  his  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,— men  who  thought  that  God  could 
never  reject  them,  the  trueborn  heirs  of  his  king- 
dojn,  and  banish  them  from  it. 

t  T.  vi.  Joh.  c.  17. 

\  Lib.  iii.  25,  26.  "  Parum  esse  baptizari  et  eu- 
charistiam  accipere,  nisi  quis  factis  et  opere  pro- 
ficiat." 


CARNAL  CHRISTIANITY. 


155 


trines  of  religion  should  be  preserved  by 
the  clearest  development  of  the  ideas  be- 
longing to  them,  from  a  perversion,  which 
the  fleshly  appetites  of  man  are  naturally 
inclined  to  cherish. 

As  one  set  of  persons,  by  substituting 
the  outward  observances  of  religion  for 
its  inward  feelings,  supported  their  con- 
tinuance in  the  practice  of  sins  which 
they  were  unwilling  to  renounce,  another 
made  themselves  easy  by  the  semblance 
of  an  inward  religion,  independent  of 
every  thing  outward.  "God,"  said  they, 
"  is  satisfied,  if  He  be  honoured  in  heart 
and  soul,  although  there  be  a  deficiency 
of  works  in  consequence  of  human  weak- 
ness." "  This  is,"  says  Tertullian,  in 
holy  indignation,  "to  sin  without  vio- 
lating the  reverence  due  to  God,  and  with- 
out violating  our  faith;  hut  then,  such 
persons  may  be  condemned  without  any 
violation  of  God's  mercy."* 

It  was  peculiar  to  Christianity,  that  it 
could  find  its  way  into  men's  hearts  by 
addressing  the  fleshly  knowledge  and  feel- 
ings of  man,  and  form  this  fleshly  gradu- 
ally into  a  spiritual  nature,  while  it  worked 
upon  the  inmost  foundations  of  human 
nature,  and  by  communicating  a  Divine 
principle  of  life,  produced  a  conduct,  the 
consequences  of  which,  in  relation  to  the 
whole  spiritual  and  moral  life,  coidd  only 
develope  themselves  gradually  in  their  full 
extent.  In  our  estimate,  therefore,  of  the 
men  of  this  time,  who  received  this  new 
and  abundant  spirit  in  the  form  which 
clung  to  them  from  their  former  carnal 
education  and  modes  of  thought,  we  must 
be  careful  not  to  judge  harshly  of  their 
hiward  feelings  from  many  of  the  rude 
notions  that  still  remained  to  them,  and 
from  which  they  could  only  be  freed 
gradually  by  the  spiritualization  of  their 
whole  habits  of  thought.  •  The  great  say- 
iog  of  the  apostle  may  here  often  find  a 
just  application  in  this  sense;  that  God's 
treasures  are  received  into  earthen  vessels, 
and  there  preserved  for  a  long  time  in 
order  that  the  abundant  power  may  be  of 
God,  and  not  of  men.  It  is,  therefore,  a 
very  superficial  and  unjust  judgment  to 
pass  on  men,  who  formed  to  themselves 
•wonderful  imaginations  about  God,  and 
Divine  things,  and  the  kingdom  of  God, 
immediately  to  conclude,  that  they  had 
nothing  of  Christian  life  within  them. 
When,  indeed,  men  of  this  sort,  having 
been  induced  to  believe  by  some  outward 
or   inward   motives,  did    not,   in  conse- 

*  Tertullian,  de  Poenitentia,  c.  v. 


quence,  give  themselves  up  to  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  so  that  He  might  complete  his 
work  of  regeneration  in  them ;  when  they 
still  obstinately  adhered  to  the  fleshly 
j  Christ  of  their  own  fancy,  and  expected 
I  from  Him,  though  not  now,  yet  hereafter, 
only  carnal  things;  and  when  they  would 
not  be  of  those  who  having  known  Christ 
only  according  to  the  flesh,  would  know 
Him  thus  no  longer?  we  may  conclude 
that  they  belong  to  those,  with  whom  the 
seed  fell  among  thorns,  and  the  thorns 
grew  up  and  choked  it;  they  had  heard 
and  received  the  word,  but  their  fleshly 
thoughts,  which  they  would  not  renounce, 
choked  the  word,  so  that  it  could  produce 
no  fruit.  Even  although  the  expectation 
of  a  sensual  happiness  in  a  remote  futurity, 
of  which,  with  all  the  enthusiastic  powers 
of  imagination,  they  formed  to  themselves 
such  conceptions  as  would  enchant  their 
sensual  notions,  was  sufficient  to  induce 
them  to  deny  the  appetites  of  the  moment, 
and  even  to  bear  tortures  and  to  meet  death, 
they  might,  nevertheless,  be  far  from  that 
real  new  birth,  by  which  alone  man  can 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and  the 
spirit  of  ennobling  love,  which  is  the  es- 
sential mark  of  a  disciple  of  Christ,  and 
which,  even  where  something  of  earthly 
dross  remains,  comes  forth  in  such  mani- 
festations as  are  not  to  be  mistaken,  at 
least  by  the  spiritual  eye, — this  spirit 
could  never  have  found,  in  that  sort  of 
life,  access  to  their  hearts. 

We  must,  therefore,  be  cautious,  on  the 
one  hand,  that  we  do  not  expect  to  find, 
in  these  first  days  of  the  Church,  any  ex- 
clusively golden  age  of  purity ;  nor,  in  the 
visible  Church,  any  community,  entirely- 
glorious,  and  without  spot  or  wrinkle,* 
nor  any  thing  of  the  sort;  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  we  do  not  fail  to  perceive 
the  heavenly  beauty  which  really  did 
beam  through  the  stains  and  blemishes 


*  The  apologetic  writers  themselves  do  not 
deny,  that  there  were  many  that  passed  under  the 
name  of  Christians,  who  yet  belied  the  very  na- 
ture of  Christianity  by  their  lives,  and  gave,  occa- 
sion to  the  heathen  to  calumniate  Christianity ;  but 
then  they  declare,  that  these  men  were  never  re- 
cognised as  Christians  by  the  Christian  Churches; 
and  they  require  the  heathen  to  judge  all  according 
to  their  lives,  and  whatever  they  found  worthy  of 
punishment,  to  punish  it,  wherever  it  might  be. 
80  Justin  Martyr,  and  so  Tertullian,  (ad  Nation, 
lib.  i.  c.  .5.)  The  latter  says,  "  When  you  say 
that  the  Christians  arc  the  basest  of  men  in  regard 
to  covetousness,  luxury,  and  dishonesty,  we  are  not 
about  to  deny  that  there  are  some  of  that  kind ; 
even  in  the  cleanest  body  a  mole  will  sometimes 
make  ita  appearance," 


156 


VISIBLE  CHURCH  NOT  SPOTLESS  — BROTHERLY  LOVE. 


of  the  early  Church.  If  a  man  look  only 
on  one  side  or  on  the  other  exclusively, 
he  figures  to  himself  either  some  form  of 
ideal  perfection  or  some  disfigured  carica- 
ture; but  an  unprejudiced  representation, 
after  unprejudiced  observation,  will  avoid 
both  these  errors.  | 

That  which  our  Saviour  himself,  in  his  | 
last  conversation  with  his  disciples,  pro-  I 
claimed  as  the  mark  by  which  his  disci-  j 
pies  might  be  known,  the  mark  of  their ' 
fellowship  with  him  and  their  heavenly  | 
Father,  and  tlie  mark  of  his  glory  dwelling  j 
among  them — namely,  that  they  should 
love  one  another, — this  was  assuredly  the  i 
prominent  feature  of  the  early  Christian  j 
Churches;  a  feature  which  did  not  fail  to  j 
strike  even  the  heathen  themselves.  The  j 
names  "  brother"  and  "  sister,"  which  the 
Christians  interchanged,  were  not  empty  | 
names ;  the  kiss  of  brotherhood,  which  I 
was  bestowed  on  every  person  at  his  ad- 
mission into  the  Christian.  Church,  after 
baptism,  by  those  Christians  into  whose  i 
immediate  society  he  was  ^bout  to  enter;  i 
this  kiss,  which  the  members  of  a  Church  ' 
bestowed  on  one  another,  before  the  cele-  | 
bration  of  the  communion,  and  with  which  j 
every  Christian  saluted  another  even  when  ] 
he  saw  him  for  the  first  time,  was  no  mere  { 
formality,*  but  all  this  was  originally  an  j 
expression  of  Christian  feeling,  and  a  I 
token  of  the  relations  in  which  Christians  ' 
. . I 

*  Every  one  who  knows  human  nature,  will  \ 
easily  see  that  this  cannot  be  affirmed  of  any  thing,  ! 
and  of  any  period,  entirely  without  limitation.  | 
What  was  originally  only  a  pure  expression  of 
heartfelt  sensations,  and  remains  so  among  a  great  ' 
many,  may  yet  become,  among  others,  only  a  ; 
counterfeited  gesture,  and  in  their  self-delusion  ' 
they  may,  perhaps,  think  that  they  thereby  make  i 
amends  for  the  spirit,  in  which  they  are  wanting,  i 
and  which  cannot  be  counterfeited.  Clement  of 
Alexandria  accordingly  complains,  that  there  were 
many  in  his  time  who  made  a  matter  of  ostenta- 
tion of  the  brotherly  kiss,  and  gave  great  offence 
to  the  heathen  unnecessarily,  by  that  means,  and  | 
who  placed  the  essential  of  brotherly  love  in  the  j 
brotherly  kiss.  He  says,  on  this  subject,  (Pa;dagog. 
lib.  iii.  p.  256,  257,)  "  Love  must  be  estimated  by  I 
benevolence,  not  by  the  brotherly  kiss.  But  there  ; 
are  many,  who  only  disturb  the  Church  with  the 
brotherly  kiss,  without  having  the  spirit  of  love  in 
their  hearts  (oj  Si  ouift  vK\^  «  <f;A«/ua,T«  xarrt^c^oua-/  i 
tdu;  'iicKKntrfJK,  to  <piKouv  ivJov  ouk  J;^cvtsc  ctiiTc.)  This 
has  also  spread  about  an  evil  jealousy  and  accusa-  I 
lions,  because  men  give  publicly  the  brotherly  kiss,  ^ 
which  ought  to  be  done  privately.  The  salutations  1 
also  of  those  who  are  dear  to  us,  in  the  streets,  so  | 
as  to  be  seen  of  the  heathen,  are  not  of  the  smallest  I 
value.  For  if  it  be  right  to  pray  to  (iod  in  our  ! 
chamber  in  secret,  it  follows  from  this,  that  wo 
ought  to  show  our  love  to  our  neighbour  also  in 
secret  in  our  inward  heart,  arid  yield  to  the  times, 
because  we  are  the  salt  of  the  earth." 


considered  one  another.  This  was  the 
thing,  as  we  have  before  had  occasion  to 
remark,  which,  in  an  age  of  cold  selfish- 
ness, most  struck  the  heathen — that  men, 
from  so  many  diflferent  countries,  of  such 
different  circumstances  and  relations  one 
with  the  other,  and  of  such  different  de- 
grees of  education,  should  appear  in  such 
inward  harmony  and  union  with  each 
other;  as,  for  instance,  that  a  stranger 
coming  into  a  town,  and  having  made 
himself  known  to  the  Christians,  through 
an  "  epistola  formata,"  as  a  real  brother 
Christian,  immediately  received,  even 
from  those  to  whom  he  was  personally 
unknown,  all  the  attentions  and  the  sup- 
port befitting  a  brother. 

The  care  of  providing  for  the  support 
and  maintenance  of  the  stranger,  the  poor, 
and  the  sick,  of  the  old  men,  widows,  and 
orphans,  and  of  those  who  were  impri- 
soned for  the  faith's  sake,  devolved  on  the 
whole  community.  This  was  one  of  the 
chief  purposes  for  which  voluntary  con- 
tributions at  the  times  of  assembling  for 
divine  service  were  established,  and  the 
charity  of  individuals  outstripped  even 
this.  How  peculiarly  this  was  considered 
as  the  business  of  a  Christian  mistress  of 
a  family,  we  may  judge  from  Tertullian, 
where,  in  painting  the  disadvantages  of  a 
marriage  between  a  heathen  and  a  Chris- 
tian woman,  he  peculiarly  dwells  on  this, 
that  the  Christian  would  be  obstructed  in 
that  which  was  usually  reckoned  as  in 
the  circle  of  a  Christian  woman's  domestic 
duties.  "  What  heathen,"  says  he, "  will 
suffer  his  wife,  in  visiting  the  brethren,  to 
go  from  street  to  street,  into  strangers', 
and  even  into  the  most  miserable  cot- 
tages ?  Who  will  suffer  them  to  steal 
into  prisons,  to  kiss  the  chains  of  mar- 
tyrs .''  If  a  stranger-brother  comes,  what 
reception  will  he  find  in  a  sl.ranger''s 
house?*  If  she  has  to  bestow  alms  on 
any  one,  the  safe  and  the  cellar  are  closed 
to  her."t  On  the  other  hand,'  he  lays  it 
down  as  one  of  the  joys  attendant  on  a 
marriage  between  Christians,  that  the  wife 
may  visit  the  sick  and  support  the  needy, 
and  need  not  be  under  anxiety  about  her 
alms-giving.  J 

The    active    brotherly   love   of    each 

*  Tertullian  apparently  lays  a  particular  stress 
on  the  word  "  stranger,"  "  in  aliena  domo,"  the 
house  which  is  a  strange  one  to  the  Christian ;  as 
the  house  of  a  Christian  woman  ought  not  to  be 
a  strange  one  to  him. 

-j"  Ad  Uxorcm,  ii.  4. 

i  lioc.  cit.  c.  8.  "  Libero  seger  visitatur,  indi- 
gens  sustentatur,  eleemosynse  sine  tormento." 


ESSENTIALS    OF    CHRISTIAN   LOVE. 


157 


Church  was  not,  however,  limited  to  its 
own  narrow  circle,  but  extended  to  the 
wants  of  Churches  in  distant  places. 
Under  any  pressing  necessity  of  this  na- 
ture the  bishops  appointed  special  col- 
lections to  be  made,  «nd  also  appointed 
fastdays,  in  order  that  what  was  spared 
from  the  daily  expenses  even  of  the  poorer 
members  of  the  community  might  be 
contributed  to  the  general  need.*  If  the 
Churches  of  the  provincial  towns  were 
too  poor  to  meet  any  pressing  distress, 
they  applied  to  the  richer  one  in  the  me- 
tropolis. A  case,  for  example,  had  occur- 
red, in  which  Christian  men  and  women 
from  Numidia  had  fallen  into  captivity 
among  the  neighbouring  barbarians,  and 
the  Numidian  Churciies  were  unable  to 
raise  the  sum  requisite  for  their  ransom  ; 
they  applied  to  the  richer  Church  of  the 
great  North  African  metropolis.  Cyprian, 
the  bishop  of  Carthage,  soon  raised  a  sum 
of  more  than  four  thousand  dollars,^  and 
sent  it  with  a  letter  which  breathed  the 
true  spirit  of  Christian  sympathy  and  bro- 
therly love.J  "  In  cases  like  these,"  he 
writes  to  them,  "  who  would  not  feel  sor- 
row, and  who  would  not  look  upon  his 
brother's  suffering  as  his  own!  as  the 
apostle  Paul  says:  'When  one  member 
suffers,  all  the  members  suffer  with  it,' 
and  in  another  place,  'Who  is  weak,  and 
I  become  not  weak?'  Therefore  must 
we  consider  the  captivity  of  our  brethren 
as  our  own  captivity,  and  the  sorrow  of 
those  in  danger  as  our  own  affliction,  in- 
asmuch as  we  are  bound  together  into 
one  body;  and  not  only  love,  but  religion 
ought  to  incite  and  cheer  us  on  in  re- 
deeming the  lives  of  the  brethren  who 
are  our  members.  For  the  apostle  Paul 
again,  in  another  place,  says,  *•  Know  ye 
not  that  ye  are  the  temple  of  God,  and 
the  Spirit  of  God  dwells  in  you.'  (1  Cor. 
iii.  16,)  and  so  even  if  love  will  not  move 
us  to  give  assistance  to  our  brethren,  we 
ought  to  remember  here,  that  it  is  tlie 
temple  of  God  which  is  in  captivity,  and 
we  ought  not,  by  long  delays  and  bj'  a 
neglect  of  these  calamities,  to  suffer  that 
the  temple  of  God  should  remain  long  in 
captivity.  .  .  .  For  since  the  apostle  Paul 
says,  'As  many  of  you  as  are  baptized, 
have  put  on  Christ,'  so  must  we  see  Christ 


•  Tertullian,  de  Jejuniis,  c  13.  "Episcopi  uni- 
verse plebi  mandare  jejunia  assolent — industria 
stipium  conferendarum." 

■j-  Sestertiarentum  millia  nummorum.  [About 
£800.— H.  J.  R.] 

i  Ep.  Ix.  [Ep.  IxiL  cd.  Ox.] 


in  our  captive  brethren,  and  we  must  re- 
deem Ilim  from  captivity,  who  redeemed 
us  from  death,  so  that  He  who  lias  saved 
us  from  the  jaws  of  Satan,  and  who  now 
dwells  and  remains  in  us,  may  himself  be 
freed  from  the  hands  of  barbarians,  and 
that  he  may  be  redeemed  by  a  sum  of 
money,  who  redeemed  us  by  his  cross 
and  blood;  and  He  hath  allowed  this  in 
the  mean  time  to  take  place,  in  order  that 
our  faith  may  be  tried,  whether  every  one 
will  do  that  for  others,  which  he  w^ould 
wish  to  be  done  for  himself,  were  he  in 
captivity  among  barbarians.  For  who  that 
is  alive  to  the  feelings  of  humanity  and 
mutual  love,  would  not,  if  he  is  a  father, 
look  upon  it  as  if  it  regarded  his  own 
sons,  or  if  he  be  a  husband,  would  not 
feel  that,  as  it  were,  his  own  wife  is  taken 
captive,  to  the  shame  and  the  sorrow  of 
the  conjugal  yoke .'  .  .  .  And  we  wish 
also,  that  for  the  future  nothing  of  this 
sort  may  happen,  and  that  our  brethren,  by 
the  might  of  the  Lord,  may  be  preserved 
from  similar  calamities.  But  if  any  thing 
like  this  should  again  occur,  to  prove  the 
love  and  the  faith  of  our  hearts,  delay  ye 
not  to  give  us  tiding  of  it  by  your  let- 
ters, being  persuaded  that  all  our  brethren 
here  pray  that  these  things  may  not  occur 
again,  but  that  they  will  again  readily  and 
plentifully  give  assistance  if  they  do." 

That  which  stamped  a  Christian  cha- 
racter on  these  acts  of  benevolence,  could 
only  be  the  lively  feelings  which  here 
declared  themselves,  if  these  works  pro- 
ceeded only  out  of  a  childlike  love  and 
thankfulness  towards  the  Redeemer,  and 
out  of  brotherly  love  towards  their  com- 
panions in  redemption,  and  if  they  joy- 
fully proceeded  out  of  the  inward  im- 
pulses of  love.  If,  on  the  contrary,  men 
thought  to  deserve  something  by  works 
like  these,  if  they  bowed  themselves  un- 
willingly as  it  were  under  the  yoke  of  a 
compulsory  law,  then  the  Christian  cha- 
racter was  lost,  and  good  works,  which 
ought  to  be  the  spontaneous  fruits  of  faith 
working  through  love,  were  only  forcibly 
wrung  from  a  selfish  spirit,  not  subdued 
through  the  spirit  of  love  to  the  Re- 
deemer, by  a  law  which  commanded, 
which  threatened,  and  which  promised. — 
nay,  they  might  be  the  very  fruits  of  a 
refined  selfishness,  and  afford  food  to  the 
sinful  parts  of  human  nature.  The  old 
man  has  constantly  been  inclined  to  seek 
such  support,  and  to  betake  himself  to 
outward  observances  instead  of  inward 
holiness,  and  as  soon  as  men  relinquished 
the  notion  of  setting  the  whole  Christian 
0 


168 


HEATHEN    SELFISHNESS    AND    CHRISTIAN    LOVE. 


life  on  the  single  ground  of  faith  and 
confidence,  they  forgot  that  the  whole 
life  of  a  Christian  can  be  nothing  but  the 
constant  and  increasing  appropriation  and 
application  of  the  merits  of  Christ  to  the 
weakness  of  humanity,  an  increasing  re- 
velation of  fellowship  with  Him,  which 
constantly  more  and  more  penetrates  the 
whole  nature  and  ennobles  it;  and  thus 
this  error  obtained  a  deep  foundation.  In 
the  third  century  we  see  that  just  evan- 
gelical conception  of  benevolence,  and 
this  unevangelical  one  at  limes  side  by 
side,  as  in  tlie  writing  which  Cyprian 
composed  in  order  to  encourage  the 
Christians,  among  many  of  whom  bro- 
therly love  had  waxed  cold  during  a  long 
season  of  earthly  repose,  to  the  exercise 
of  this  virtue.  (De  Opere  et  Eleemosy- 
nis.)  Cyprian  beautifully  addresses  a 
father  of  a  family,  who  excused  himself 
from  the  duty  of  benevolence,  under  the 
plea  of  a  numerous  family,  in  the  follow- 
ing language  :*  "  Think  not  him  a  father 
t(.>  your  children,  who  is  a  feeble  and  mor- 
tal man,  but  seek  another  father  for  them, 
even  the  eternal  and  Almighty  Father  of 
all  spiritual  children.  Let  Him  be  the 
guardian  and  provider  for  your  children  ; 
and  the  protector  of  them  by  his  Divine 
majesty  against  all  the  evils  of  the  world. 
When  you  bestow  more  care  on  earthly 
than  on  heavenly  possessions,  you  are 
seeking  to  commend  your  children  to  Sa- 
tan rather  than  to  Christ ;  you  commit  a 
double  sin,  for  you  neglect  to  obtain  for 
your  children  the  protection  of  God,  and 
you  teach  them  to  love  possessions  rather 
than  Christ." 

In  any  times  of  public  calamity  in  the 
larger  cities,  the  contrast  was  very  striking 
between  the  cowardice  and  selfishness  of 
the  heathen,  and  the  brotherly  love  and 
willingness  of  the  Christians  to  sacrifice 
their  own  interests.  We  shall  take  a  re- 
presentation of  this  contrast  from  Diony- 
sius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  who  had  an 
opportunity  of  observing  it  in  the  different 
conduct  of  the  heathens  and  the  Chris- 
tians during  a  terrible  pestilence  in  that 
city,  in  the  reign  of  the  emperor  Gal- 
lienus.  "  That  pestilence  appeared  to  the 
heathen  as  the  most  dreadful  of  all  things, 
as  that  which  left  them  no  hope ;  not  so, 
however,  did  it  .seem  to  us,  but  only  a 
pccidiar  and  practical  trial.  The  greater 
part  of  our  people,  in  the  abundance  of 
their  brotherly  love,  did  not  spare  them- 
selves, and   mutually  attending  to  each 


other,  they  would  visit  the  sick  without 
fear,  and  ministering  to  them  for  the  sake 
of  Christ,  they  would  cheerfully  give  up 
their  life  with  them.  Many  died,  after 
their  care  had  restored  others  from  the 
disease  to  health.  The  best  among  our 
brethren,  some  priests  and  deacons,  and 
some  who  were  celebrated  among  the 
laity,  died  in  this  manner;  and  such  a 
death,  the  fruit  of  great  piety  and  strong 
faith,  is  hardly  inferior  to  martyrdoiu. 
Many  who  took  the  bodies  of  their  Chris- 
tian ijrethren  into  their  hands  and  bosoms, 
closed  their  mouth  and  eyes,  and  buried 
them  with  every  attention,  soon  followed 
them  in  death.  But  with  the  heathen 
matters  stood  quite  difTerently ;  at  the  first 
symptom  of  sickness  they  drove  a  man 
from  their  society,  they  tore  themselves 
away  from  their  dearest  connections;  they 
threw  the  half-dead  into  the  streets,  and 
left  the  dead  unburied  ;  endeavouring  by 
all  the  means  in  their  power  to  escape  con- 
tagion, which,  notwithstanding  all  their 
contrivances,  it  was  very  difficult  for  them 
to  accomplish."* 

In  the  same  manner  the  Christians  of 
Carthage  let  the  light  of  their  love  and 
Christian  conduct  shine  before  the  hea- 
then in  a  pestilence  which  visited  North 
Africa,  a  little  before,  in  the  reign  of 
Gallus.  The  heathens,  out  of  cowardice, 
left  the  sick  and  the  dying,  the  streets 
were  full  of  corpses,  which  no  man  dared 
to  bury,  and  avarice  was  the  only  passion 
which  mastered  the  fear  of  death,  for 
wicked  men  endeavoured  to  make  a  gain 
out  of  the  misfortunes  of  their  neigh- 
bours ;  and  the  heathens  accused  the 
Christians  of  being  the  cause  of  this  ca- 
lamity as  the  enemies  of  the  gods,  instead 
j  of  being  brought  by  it  to  the  consciousness 
of  tlieir  own  guilt  and  corruption.!  But 
Cyprian  required  of  his  Church,  that  they 
should  behold  in  this  desolating  pesti- 
lence a  trial  of  their  dispositions.  "  How 
j  necessary  is  it,  my  dearest  brethren,"  he 
i  says  to  them,  '^  that  this  pestilence,  which 
1  appears  to  bring  horror  and  destruction, 
should  prove  the  consciences  of  men ! 
It  will  determine  whether  the  healthy 
will  take  care  of  tJie  sick,  whether  rela- 
tions bear  tender  love  one  to  another,  and 
whether  masters  care  for  their  sick  ser- 
vants."! T^^^^t  the  Christians  should 
show    a    spirit   of  mutual   love   among 


[Page  205,  ed.  Ox— H.  J.  R.] 


*   Eiiscb.  vii.  22.     [This  account  is  consider- 
ably abridged  from  tlie  original. — 11.  J.  R.] 
I      f  Cyprian,  ad  Detnetrian. 
I      I  Lib.  de  Mortalitate. 


COXSCIEXTIOUS    CONDUCT   OF  THE    CHRISTIANS. 


159 


themselves,  was  not  sufficient  to  satisfy  a 
bishop  who  formed  his  notions  at\cr  the 
model  of  the  great  Shepherd.  He,  there- 
fore, called  his  sheep  together,  and  ad- 
dressed them  thus  :  "^  If  we  do  good  only 
to  our  own  people,  we  do  no  more  than 
publicans  and  heathens.  But  if  we  are 
the  children  of  God,  who  makes  his  sun 
to  shine,  and  his  rain  to  descend  upon 
the  just  and  upon  the  unjust,  who  sheds 
abroad  his  blessings,  not  on  his  own 
alone,  but  even  upon  those  whose 
thoughts  are  far  from  Him,  we  must 
show  this  by  our  actions,  endeavouring 
to  become  perfect  even  as  our  Father  in 
heaven  is  perfect,  and  blessing  those  who 
curse  us,  and  doing  good  to  those  w-ho 
persecute  us."  Encouraged  by  his  pa- 
ternal admonition,*  the  members  of  the 
Church  addressed  themselves  to  the 
work, — the  rich  contributing  money,  and 
the  poor  their  labour,  so  that  in  a  short 
lime,    the    streets    were    cleared    of   the 


him  for  God, — these  were  the  feelings 
which  caused  them  to  bear  this  yoke 
with  joy ;  and  the  consciousness  of  free- 
dom in  the  inward  man,  because  he  be- 
longed to  heaven,  taught  them  to  see  in 
this  yoke  no  yoke  at  all ;  and  while  the 
fear  of  man  can  only  bring  eyeservice, 
with  them  the  looking  towards  Him,  for 
whose  sake  they  did  every  thing,  in- 
1  stilled  into  their  hearts  a  spirit  of  con- 
sckntious  obedience^  even  where  no  human 
eye  could  see  them.  But  then  the  same 
spirit  of  Christianity  which  taught  them 
to  obey  man  for  the  sake  of  God,  taught 
them  also  to  obey  God  rather  than  man, 
to  sacrifice  every  consideration  whatever, 
and  to  despise  their  property  and  their 
life,  where  human  power  required  from 
them  any  compliance  which  would  break 
the  laws  of  God  ;  and  here  it  was  that  the 
Christians  showed  the  true  spirit  of  free- 
dom, against  which  no  despotism  was 
ever   able  to*  prevail.     The  first  section 


corpses  which  filled  them,  and  the  city  j  of  this  history  has  already  given  us  an 
saved  from  the  dangers  of  an  universal    opportunity  of  observing  the  effects  of 


pestilence. 

The  peculiar  spirit  of  Christianity  was 
constantly  shown  in  this,  that  in  the  new 
duties  it  commanded,  it  always  preserved 
exacllv  the  proper  medium  between  the 
opposite  dispositions,  by  which  the  na- 
tmal  man,  according  as  his  inclinations 
induce  him  to  prefer  an  easy  state  of  en- 
joyment, or  a  wild  and  ardent  activity,  is 
commonly  led  into  error.  It  is  thus  no 
uncommon  thing  in  human  life  to  observe 
the  development  of  two  such  opposite 
feelings,  the  one  a  cowardice  which  ho- 
nours man  more  than  God,  and  would 
sacrifice  all  divine  truth,  and  all  the  dig- 
nity of  human  nature  to  the  commands 
of  earthly  power,  and  the  other  a  wild 
defiance  of  all  existing  human  institutions. 
Christianity  gave  its  sanction  to  all  exist- 
ing human  institutions,  as  far  as  there  was 
nothing  in  them  which  contravened  the 
laws  of  God  :  it  left  its  genuine  profes- 
sors to  walk  in  the  laws  and  institutions 
which  they  found  existing,  even  where 
thev  were  oppressive  to  them,  with  re- 
signation and  self-denial.  The  spirit  of 
love  to  God,  from  whom  as  its  original 
source  all  earthly  power  and  order  is  de- 
rived, and  for  whose  glory  they  felt  them- 
selves bound  to  submit  to  all  the  ordi- 
nances of  man  which  are  not  at  variance 
with  his  laws — the  spirit  of  love  to  their 
neighbour,  which  endeavoured  through 
the  means    of  such  compliance  to  win 

•  [See  Pont.  Vit.  Cyprian,  p.  5.— H.  J.  R.] 


j  the  spirit  of  Christianity  in  both  these  re- 
spects. With  these  feelings,  Justin  Martyr 
says,  (Apol.  ii.,)*  "  Taxes  and  customs  we 
pay  the  most  scrupulously  of  all  men,  to 
those  who  are  appointed  by  you,  as  we 
were  taught  by  him.  (Matth.  xxii.  21.) 
Hence  we  worship  only  God  alone,  while 
at  the  same  time  we  serve  you  willingly 
in  all  other  respects,  because  we  recog- 
nise you  as  our  human  sovereign."  Ter- 
tullian  was  able  to  appeal  to  this  very  cir- 
cumstance, and  declare,  that  what  the 
state  lost  in  the  revenues  of  the  temples 
by  the  extension  of  Christianity  was 
more  than  counterbalanced  by  that  which 
it  gained  in  taxes  and  customs,  if  they 
would  only  compare  the  readiness  and 
fairness  of  the  Cliristians  with  the  false 
statements,  &c.,  which  were  usual  in  the 
payment  of  these  duties.f  The  Chris- 
tians were  accustomed  to  keep  the  above 
cited  saying  of  our  Lord,  (Matth.  xxii. 
21,)  constantly  in  their  mouth  and  heart, 
as  the  rule  of  their  daily  conduct,  and  he 
gives  in  opposition  to  those  who  used  it, 
according  to  his  opinion,  in  too  wide  and 
indefinite  a  sense,  the  following  interpre- 
tation of  it :  "The  image  of  Caesar,  which 
is  on  the  coins,  is  to  be  given  to  Ca;sar, 
and  the  image  of  God  which  is  in  man, 
is  to  be  given  to  God ;    therefore,  thou 


*  [Apol.  Prim.  p.  26.  (ed.  Thirlb.  1722.)— H. 
J.  R.] 

•j-  Apologet.  c.  42,"  Si  ineatur  (ratio)  quantum 
vectigalibus  pereat  fraude  et  nicndacio  vostraruni 
profe 


160 


CLVIL   AND   RELIGIOUS    DUTIES. 


must  give  the  money,  indeed,  to  Caesar, 
but  thyself  to  God;  for  what  will  remain 
to  God,  if  all  belongs  to  Ca;sar  ?"* 

The  principles,  according  to  which 
man  must  act  in  these  respects,  were 
easily  laid  down  in  theory,  and  easily  to 
be  deduced  from  Scripture,  and  from  the 
nature  of  Christianity,  and  hence,  as  far 
as  theory  was  concerned,  all  Christians 
Avere  agreed  ;  but  the  application  of  these 
principles  to  individual  cases  was  a  mat- 
ter of  great  difficulty,  because  this  in- 
volves drawing  the  limits  generally  be- 
tween that  which  is  Caesar's  and  that 
which  is  God's,  and  deciding  what  things 
are  indifferent  in  a  religious  point  of  view, 
and  what  are  not.  The  heathen  religion 
was  so  closely  interwoven  with  the  whole 
civil  and  social  life,  that  it  was  not  always 
easy  to  separate  mere  civil  and  social 
things  from  religious  affairs.  Much  which 
had  originally  proceeded  from  religious 
sources,  had  long  ago  lost  all  connection 
Avitli  religious  concerns  with  the  multi- 
tude, and,  becoming  clear  only  to  the 
learned  antiquary,  had  lost  all  its  reli- 
gious character  in  the  sight  of  the  people. 
The  question,  therefore,  arose,  whether 
persons  were  justified  in  considering  such 
things  as  indifferent  in  a  religions  point 
of  view,  and  ought  in  them  to  follow  the 
customs  of  the  age,  as  merely  civil  and 
social  matters,  or  whether  they  vvere  not 
bound,  in  consequence  of  the  connection 
these  customs  had  with  heathenism,  to 
set  all  other  considerations  aside.| 

And  still  further,  the  nature  of  Christi- 
anity was  such,  that  it  was  certain  to  pass 
a  sentence  of  condemnation  on  every  thing 
ungodly,  while  at  the  same  time,  appro- 
priating to  its  own  purposes  all  that  was 
pure  in  human  relations  and  tendencies, 
instead  of  destroying  them,  it  would  sanc- 
tify and  ennoble  them.  But  then,  again, 
the  inquiry  would  arise,  what  is  pure  in 
human  things,  and  therefore,  capable  of 
being  received  in  connection  with  Christi- 
anity, and  what,  on  the  contrary,  originally 
proceeding  from  the  corruption  of  our 
nature,  bears  on  its  very  nature  the  stamp 
of  ungodliness,  and  therefore,  must  be 
utterly  rejected  from  Christianity  .?  Now, 
inasmuch  as  Christianity  appeared   as  a 


•  TertuUian,  de  Iilololatria,  c  xv. 

\  We  may,  for  instance,  compare  what  Tertul- 
liaii  ami  Clcnit'iit  of  Alexandria,  out  of  the  trea- 
sures of  their  learnint?,  following  in  the  footsteps  of 
heathen  writers,  have  said  of  the  religious  meaning 
and  reference  of  the  ceremonies  of  crowning — 
things  which  certainly  in  common  life  no  one 
would  have  thought  of. 


new  leaven  in  an  old  world,  and  as  it  was 
destined  to  produce  a  new  creation  in  an 
old  one,  of  a  totally  different  character  and 
spirit,  the  inquiry  would,  therefore,  arise 
the  sooner,  what  of  all  that  now  exists  in 
the  world  requires  only  to  be  reformed 
and  ennobled,  and  what  must  be  utterly 
destroyed.  There  might  be  a  great  deal 
really  existing  at  that  time,  which,  under 
1  the  direction  of  the  corrupt  Avorld,  might 
appear  utterly  at  variance  with  the  essen- 
tials of  Christianity,  but  which,  however, 
by  means  of  a  different  direction  and 
another  sort  of  use,  might  be  brought 
into  perfect  harmony  with  Christian  prin- 
ciples. The  consequence  of  this  would, 
of  course  be,  that  some  men  would  con- 
demn the  good  use  of  which  things  were 
capable,  because  of  the  misuse  of  them, 
while  others  would  advocate  the  existing 
misuse  itself,  in  virtue  of  the  possible  good 
use  of  them. 

Many  institutions  also  might  exist, 
which  would  never  have  been  formed  in  a 
state  of  society  under  the  influence  of 
Christianity,  and  which  were  certainly 
foreign  to  pure  Christianity,  but  which, 
nevertheless,  under  the  guidance  of  a 
Christian  spirit,  might  be  so  modified  and 
applied,  that  they  no  longer  contained  any 
thing  at  variance  with  its  principles.  As 
Christianity  was  not  in  the  habit  of  pro- 
ducing any  violent  and  convulsive  changes 
in  external  things,  but  reformed  and 
amended  these  by  beginning  from  within, 
in  the  case  of  such  institutions,  for  the 
avoidance  of  a  greater  evil,  and  in  order 
not  to  step  out  of  its  own  peculiar  sphere 
of  spiritual  efficacy,  it  might  very  well 
allow  them  to  exist,  at  least  for  a  time,  in 
such  a  way  that  a  new  spirit  might  be 
imparted  to  the  old  form,  which  did  not 
suit  the  spirit  of  Christianity  ;  and,  at  last, 
when  men  were  prepared  for  the  change, 
by  the  influence  of  Christianity,  the  form 
itself  might  drop,  and  all  become  new. 

Under  these  circumstances,  therefore, 
the  application  of  principles,  on  which  all 
were  agreed,  might  yet  cause  difierences 
among  the  Christians,  as  a  difference  of 
habits  of  thought  and  dispositions  was 
likely  to  give  a  different  colour  to  the  re- 
lations which  things  around  bore  to  them  ; 
a  sort  of  difference,  which  in  aftertimes 
often  occurred  again  in  the  case  of  missions 
among  strange  people,  in  the  organization 
of  new  Churches,  and  in  the  decisions 
which  at  various  times  were  made  about 
matters  of  indifTerence  {a.St»(po^ot.)  An 
error  might  here  be  committed  on  one  side 
or  the  otlier,  either  by  too  lax  accommo- 


THE    STRICT    AND    THE    LAX — FORBIDDEN  PASSIONS. 

(lation  or  by  too  abrupt  rejection.  With 
the  exception  of  those  few,  who  having 
already  made  a  further  progress  in  genuine 
evangelical  freedom,  had  united  enlight- 
ened considerateness  with  the  depth  of 
Christian  zeal,  the  latter  error  was  more 
prevalent  than  the  former  among  real 
Christians ;  they  were  more  inclined  to 
cast  away  much  of  tliat  which,  in  the  days 
of  heathenism,  they  had  used  to  the  ser- 
vice of  sin  or  of  falsehood,  but  which  was 
still  capable  of  a  very  different  use,  than 
to  retain  any  thing  which  had  the  slightest 
savour  of  heathen  corruption  ;  they  were 
eager  to  cast  away  every  thing  which 
came  before  them  in  contact  with  sin  or 
heathenism  ;  they  were  inclined  to  do  too 
much,  far  rather  than  to  nullify  even  the 
smallest  portion  of  Christianity,  that  jewel, 
that  pearl,  for  which  they  were  ready  to  sell 
every  thing ;  and  this  was  natural  enough, 
for  in  the  first  warmth  of  genuine  conver- 
sion, in  the  first  fire  of  real  love,  man  is  more 
inclined  to  reject  with  abruptness  all  that 
belongs  to  the  Morld,  than  to  err  by  re- 
taining it  in  a  lax  spirit  of  accommodation. 
One  of  these  two  parties  appealed  to  the 
saying  of  our  Saviour,  that  we  must  render 
unto  Ciesar  the  things  which  are  Ceesar's, 
to  show,  that  in  all  which  relates  to  civil 
order,  men  must  obey  the  existing  laws, 
and  give  no  useless  offence  to  the  heathen, 
and  besides,  must  not  give  them  occasion 
to  speak  injuriously  of  God,  and  in  short, 
that  they  must  "  become  all  things  to  all 
men,"  in  order  to  win  them  all  to  the 
Gospel.  The  other  party  could  not  deny 
that  these  principles  were  deduced  from 
Scripture ;  but  then,  said  they,  while  we 
consider  all  external  and  earthly  things  as 
belonging  to  Caesar,  our  whole  heart  and 
life  still  must  belong  to  God*:  that  which 
is  Caesar's  must  not  come  into  competition 
with  that  which  is  God's.  If  it  be  uncon- 
ditionally true  that  we  must  give  the 
heathen  no  opportunity  whatever  of  calum- 
niating the  name  of  Christian,  we  must 
give  up  all  Christianity.  Let  them  calum- 
niate us  forever,  provided  we  give  them 
no  opportunity  of  doing  so  by  unchristian 
conduct;  let  them  continue  to  calumniate 
us,  if  they  only  abuse  what  is  truly  Chris- 
tian in  us.  In  the  proper  sense,  we  are 
willing  "  to  become  all  things  to  all  men," 
but  not  if  we  are  expected  to  become 
worldly  to  the  worldly ;  for  we  have  it 
written,  "  if  I  please  men,  I  am  not  the  ser- 
vant of  Christ."*  It  is  easy  to  see  that  both 
these  parties  were  right  in  the  principles 


*  Tertullian,  de  Idololatria. 
21 


161 

which  they  laid  down, but  the  only  question 
was,  how  to  apply  these  principles  justly. 

Those  who  exercised  trades  contrary  to 
the  general  and  recognised  principles  of 
Christianity,  Avere  not  admitted  to  baptism, 
before  they  had  pledged  themselves  to 
relinquish  them.*  They  were  obliged  to 
begin  a  new  trade,  in  order  to  obtain  a 
livelihood,  or  in  case  they  were  unable  to 
do  so,  they  were  received  into  the  number 
of  the  poor  of  the  Church.  Among  these 
trades  were  reckoned  all  which  had  the 
smallest  connection  of  any  kind  whatever 
with  idolatry,  and  might  contribute  to  its 
furtherance,  as  those  of  artists  and  work- 
men, who  employed  themselves  in  making 
or  adorning  images  of  the  gods.  Many 
who  wished  to  continue  these  trades,  as  a 
means  of  subsistence,  excused  themselves 
under  the  plea,  that  they  were  no  wor- 
shippers of  idols,  and  that  they  considered 
these  images  not  as  objects  of  religion,  but 
as  mere  objects  of  art;  but  in  those  days 
it  must  have  argued  great  lukewarmness 
in  religious  feeling,  to  separate  religion  and 
art  so  sophistically.  Tertullian,  on  the 
contrary,  declares  with  pious  warmth, 
"  And  yet  most  assuredly,  to  obtain  honour 
for  idols,  is  to  honour  them  yourself;  you 
bring  no  offering,  indeed,  of  any  thing  else 
to  them,  but  you  offer  up  your  own  spirit 
to  them — your  sweat  is  their  drink-offer- 
ing, and  you  light  the  torch  of  your  cun- 
ning in  honour  of  them."t  Among  these 
unlawful  callings  were  also  reckoned  all 
kinds  of  astrology  and  magical  arts,  then 
such  prevailing  and  profitable  sources  of 
delusion  and  deceit. 

The  cruel  pleasure  which  the  Roman 
people  received  from  the  sanguinary 
shows  of  gladiators,  gives  a  remarkable 
proof  how  completely  the  moral  and  hu- 
mane feelings  of  our  nature  may  be  re- 
pressed by  education  and  habit,  and  how 
a  narrow-hearted  political  sentiment  may 
destroy  the  common  sentiments  of  hu- 
manity. This  was  a  pleasure  which  those 
who  aspired  to  the  character  of  civiliza- 
tion scrupled  not  to  partake  in,  which 
law-givers  and  statesmen,  and  even  those 
who  claimed  the  name  of  philosophers, 
were  not  ashamed  to  approve  of,  and  pro- 
mote. The  feelings,  however,  of  univer- 
sal love  and  charity,  first  called  into  life 


*  Apostol.  Constitut.  lib.  viii.  c.  31.  The 
council  of  Elvira  also,  can.  62.,  "Si  auriga  ct  pan- 
tomimus  credere  voluerint,  placuit,  ut  prius  actibus 
suis  renuntient  et  tunc  demum  suscipiantur,  ita  ut 
ulterius  ad  ea  non  rcvertantur.  Qui  si  faccre  contra 
interdictum  tuntaverint,  projiciantur  ab  ecclesia." 

t  Tertull.  de  Idololat.  c.  \i. 

o2 


162 


SHOWS    OF    GLADIATORS    FORBIDDEN. 


and  action  by  Christianity,  must,  from  its 
earliest  rise,  have  struggled  against  this 
species  of  cruelty,  wiiich  the  laws  and 
the  prevailing  sentiments  of  the  Romans 
allowed  and  approved.  Those  who  at- 
tended the  combats  of  gladiators  and  of 
wild  beasts,  according  to  the  principle 
which  the  Church  established,  were  ex- 
connnunicated.  Irenscus,  with  horror, 
calls  it  the  extremes!  denial  of  the 
Christian  character,  when  some  among 
the  vvUd,  fanatical,  and  antinomian  sect 
of  the  Gnostics  would  not  even  refrain 
from  participating  in  those  bloody  shows, 
the  objects  of  hatred  at  once  to  God  and 
man.*  While  Cyprian  is  proclaiming  the 
joy  of  a  Christian,  in  feeling  that  he  has 
departed  Irom  the  corruptions  of  the  hea- 
then world,  and  while  he  is  looking  on 
these  from  a  Christian's  point  of  view, 
he  says,|  "  If  you  cast  your  eyes  upon 
the  towns,  you  meet  widi  an  assembly 
which  is  more  frightful  than  solitude.  A 
combat  of  gladiators  is  in  preparation,  in 
order  to  gratify  the  thirst  of  cruel  eyes 
with  blood.  A  man  is  put  to  death  for 
the  pleasure  of  men,  murder  becomes  a 
profession,  and  crime  not  only  practised, 
but  even  taught."  TertuUian  says  to  the 
heathen,!  who  defended  the  shows  of  gla- 
diators, and  in  their  defence  alleged,  that 
those  who  were  capitally  guilty  Avere  often 
made  use  of  in  these  combats,  "  who  but 
a  criminal  can  deny  that  it  is  well  crimi- 
nals should  be  punished  }  and  yet  the  in- 
nocent can  never  rejoice  in  the  punish- 
ment of  his  neighbour;  nay,  it  rather 
becomes  the  innocent  to  lament,  when  a 
man,  his  fellow-creature,  is  so  guilty,  that 
he  requires  so  cruel  a  mode  of  execution. 
But  who  will  give  me  any  security  that 
only  the  guilty  are  ever  thrown  to  wild 
beasts,  or  condemned  to  any  other  capital 
punishment,  and  that  innocence  never 
suffers  this  mode  of  death,  from  the  love 
of  vengeance  in  a  judge,  from  tlie  weak- 
ness of  its  advocate,  or  from  the  power 
of  torture  .^  .  .  .  .  But  at  any  rate  the 
gladiators  come  lo  the  combat  uncharged 
•with  any  guilt,  but  solely  to  become  the 
victims  of  a  public  passion.  And  as  to 
those  who  are  sentenced  to  these  com- 
bats, is  it  proper  that  the  punishment, 
■which  ought  to  serve  as  a  means  of 
amendment  to   men  guilty  of  a  venial 


transgression,  should  expressly  lead  them 
to  become  murderers  r" 

But  it  was  not  the  participation  in  these 
cruel  amusements  alone,  which  appeared 
to  the  Christians  incompatible  with  the 
nature  of  their  calling,  but  this  condemna- 
tion extended  also  to  every  kind  of  spec- 
tacle exhibited  in  those  days,  to  the  panto- 
mimic shows,  the  tragedies,  and  comedies, 
the  chariot  and  foot  races,  in  short  to  all 
the  amusements  of  the  theatre  and  the 
circus.  As  the  Romans  of  those  days 
were  passionately  addicted  to  theatrical 
entertainments,  it  was  no  uncommon  mark 
by  which  a  man's  conversion  to  Chris- 
tianity was  ascertained,  that  he  wholly 
withdrew  from  the  theatre.*  Theatrical 
exhibitions  were  supposed  part  and  parcel 
of  idolatry,  inasmuch  as  they  derived 
their  origin  from  the  heathen  worship, 
and  were  still  connected  with  many  of 
the  heathen  festivals.  These  exhibitions 
were  especially  included  in  the  pomps  of 
idolatry  and  Satan,  (the  vo/ji.Trv  ^ia|3o^ot;,) 
which  Christians  were  bound  at  their 
baptism  to  renounce,  by  the  pledge  which 
they  took  upon  themselves  at  their  en- 
trance into  the  rank  of  soldiers  of  the 
kingdom  of  God — (the  sacramentum  mi- 
litise  Christi.)  In  many  of  them  much 
took  place  which  violated  the  moral  feel- 
ings and  decencies  of  Christians,  and  even 
where  this  was  not  the  case,  yet  even  then 
the  hour-long  pursuit  of  idle  and  vain 
objects — the  unholy  spirit  which  reigned 
in  these  assemblies — the  wild  uproar  of 
tlie  collected  multitude,  seemed  hardly  to 
suit  the  holy  seriousness  of  the  Chris- 
tian's priestly  character.  The  Christians 
considered  themselves  as  priests,  conse- 
crated to  God  for  their  whole  life,  as  tem- 
ples of  the  -Holy  Ghost ;  all,  therefore, 
which  was  foreign  to  that  Spirit,  whose 
dwelling-place  in  their  hearts  they  were 
bound  to  keep  ready  for  him,  was  to  be 
kept  far  away  from  them.  "  God  hath 
commanded,"  says  TertuUian,  de  Specta- 
cidis,  c.  xv.,!  "  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  a 
Spirit  essentially  tender  and  kind,  should 
be  received  with  tranquillity  and  gentle- 
ness, with  peace  and  stillness,  and  not  be 
disquieted  by  passion,  rage,  anger,  and  the 
violence  of  irritated  feelings.  How  can 
such  a  Spirit  put  up  with  the  exhibitions 
of  the    playhouse }     For   no  play  goes 


•   Irenacus,  lib.  i.  ch.  vi.,  'Qc  /u-Ji  th;  jra^a  Qfo, 

]  Ep.  ad  Donat. 

j  De  ypectaculis,  c.  xix. 


*  Tertullian  de  Spectaculis,  c.  xxiv.  "Hinc 
vel  maxiine  ethnici  intelligunt  factum  Chris- 
tianum  de  repudio  spectaculorum." 

j  [Part"  of  this  passage  is  in  c.  xvii.  and  part  in 
c.xxv.— H.  J.  R.I 


THEATRICAL    AMUSEMENTS    OPPOSED   TO    SERIOUSNESS. 


163 


off  without  violent  commotion  of  the 
minds  of  the  spectators.  .  .  .  No  one,  in 
the  theatre,  thinks  of  any  thing  else  than 
to  see  and  to  be  seen.  Amidst  the  cla- 
mour of  the  players  can  any  man  think, 
upon  the  promise  of  a  prophet,  or  medi- 
tate upon  a  Psalm  during  the  melodious 
strains  of  an  eunuch  }  .  .  .  .  Now,  since 
with  us  all  immodesty  is  an  object  of 
horror,  how  can  we  dare  there  to  listen 
to  things  which  we  dare  not  speak,  while 
we  know  that  all  useless  and  trifling 
discourse  is  condemned  bv  the  Lord .'" 
Malt.  xii.  36.  Ephes.  iv.  29 ;  v.  4.  So 
constantly  had  the  Christians  in  their 
judgment  on  all  their  relations  in  life, 
the  pattern  of  the  Divine  word  and  the 
nature  of  their  Christian  calling  before 
their  eyes  ! 

To  Tertullian,  who  was,  no  doubt,  in- 
clined to  behold  in  every  kind  of  art  a  lie 
which  counterfeited  the  original  nature 
created  by  God,  the  whole  system  of  plays 
appeared  an  art  of  mere  representation 
and  lies  :  "  The  Creater  of  truth" — says 
he,  1.  c.  ch.  xxiii — "  loves  nothing  false, 
with  him  all  fiction  is  falsehood  ;  he  who 
condemns  all  hypocrisy,  will  never  ap- 
prove of  any  man,  who  counterfeits  voice, 
sex,  age,  love,  hatred,  sighs,  and  tears. 

When  persons  of  weak  minds,  who 
thought  really  that  it  was  unchristian  to 
frequent  the  theatres,  yet  suffered  them- 
selves to  be  carried  away  by  the  prevail- 
ing manners,  and  frequent  them  ;  things 
would  sometimes  occur  to  them  there,  I 
which  inflicted  a  deep  wound  on  their 
Christian  feelings,  produced  remorse  of 
conscience  in  them,  and  destroyed  their 
peace  of  uiind,  in  a  manner  which  long 
continued  to  be  prejudicial  to  them.* 
Others,  after  they  had  once  or  twice, 
against  the  voice  of  their  Christian  con- 
science, suflered  the  love  of  pleasure  to 
bring  them  to  the  theatre,  again  took  a 
liking  for  these  things,|  and  by  their  pas- 


*  Tertullian  gives  us  some  examples,  1.  c.  ch. 
xxvi.  A  woman,  who  went  to  the  theatre,  return- 
ed home  from  it  in  the  miserable  coiiclition  of  a 
person  possessed  by  an  evil  spirit ;  and  when  it 
was  attempted  to  exorcise  the  spirit,  and  he  was 
asked  how  he  dared  to  take  possession  of  the  soul 
of  a  believer,  he  said,  or  the  sick  person,  who  ima- 
gined that  he  was  speaking  in  the  name  of  the 
evil  spirit,  said,  "  I  was  quite  justified  in  what  I 
did,  I  seized  upon  her  while  she  was  in  a  place 
where  my  dominion  lies."  Another,  after  visiting 
the  theatre,  saw  a  fearful  vision  in  the  night,  and 
it  was,  perhaps,  in  consequence  of  the  alarm  into 
which  she  was  thrown  by  it,  that  she  died  five 
days  afterwards. 

■\  Tertullian,  de  Spectaculis,  ch.  XX vi.     "Quot 


j  sion  for  theatrical  amusements,  they  were 
again    by   degrees  drawn    back  into  the 
vortex  of  heathenism. 
I      The  heathens  and  Christians  of  a  light 
land  trivial  disposition  were  in  the  habit 
j  of  urging  on  the  more  serious  the  follow- 
ing arguments  :  Why  should  they  with- 
[  draw  from  these  public  pleasures  .'     Such 
outward  pleasures  of  the  eye  and  ear  need 
j  not  banish  religion  from  the  heart.     God 
j  would  not  be  injured  by  the  pleasures  of 
men,  and  to  enjoy  these,  in  their  proper 
'  place  and  season,  without  any  violation 
I  of  the  fear  or  the  reverence  due  to  God, 
[  could  be  no  crime.*     So  Celsus,  when  he 
j  challenges  the  Christians  to  partake  in  the 
public  festivals,  says  to  them,  "  God  is 
j  the  common  God  of  all,  he  is  good  and 
I  without  wants,  and   free  from  jealousy. 
j  What  then  should  prevent  those  who  are 
[  so  especially  consecrated  to  him  from  par- 
taking in  the  public  festivals.|     This  is 
i  quite  in  accordance  with  the  usual  wavs 
!  of  levity,  and  a  cold-hearted  love  of  the 
world,  which,  in  opposing  itself  to  moral 
!  seriousness  of  a  high  order,  generally  puts 
I  on  a  most  imposing  air  of  philosophy. 
I  Tertullian  gives    the    following  answer  : 
''  But   it  is  then  our  business    to  show, 
how  these  pleasures  cannot  possibly  con- 
sist with  true  religion  and  true  obedience 
towards  the  true  God." 

Another  argument,  by  which  some  who 
were  devoted  to  amusements  endeavoured 
to  silence  their  Christian  conscience,  was 
the  following :  that  in  these  exhibitions 
only  such  things  were  made  use  of  as  be- 
longed to  the  gif^s  of  God,  which  he  had 
bestowed  on  man  in  order  that  man  might 
enjoy  them.  No  place  either  of  Holy 
Writ  could  be  alleged,  in  which  plays 
were  expressly  forbidden.  In  regard  to 
chariot  races,  the  riding  in  chariots  could 
have  nothing  sinful  in  it,  for  Elijah  was 
taken  to  heaven  in  a  chariot.  Music  and 
dancing  in  the  theatre  could  not  be  for- 
bidden, for  we  read  in  Scripture  of  choirs, 
of  stringed  instruments,  of  cymbals,  horns, 
and  trumpets;  we  read  of  king  David's 
dancing  and  playing  before  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  (1  Chron.  xvi.  29,)  and  we  find 
the  apostle  Paul  borrowing  for  the  ex- 
hortation of  Christians,  similes  from  the 


documenta  de  his,  qui  cum  diabolo  apud  specta- 
cula  communicando  a  Domino  exciderunt !" 

*  Tertull.  1.  c.  ch.  i. 

I  Origcn,  c.  Cels.  Lib.  viii.  c.  21.      'o  )«,«»» 

T/  t,'ji  tut>VH  n^vq y.-JLKi'nx)i,x'i»7utifA9ii>\ii;  adrrif  x.'Xi  Tctii 


164 


CHRISTIAN    PLEASURES. 


gymnastic  ^ames  and  the  circus.*  Ephes. 
vi.  13.  2  Tim.  iv.  7,  8.  Philipp.  iii.  14. 
TertuUian,  in  reply  to  this  sophistry,  says, 
"  Oh !  how  acute  in  argument  does  hu- 
man ignorance  fancy  itself,  especially 
when  it  is  afraid  of  losing  some  of  the 
pleasures  and  enjoyments  of  the  world." 
Against  the  first  argument  he  says,  "  As- 
suredly all  things  are  the  gift  of  God;  but 
then  the  question  is,  to  what  purpose 
were  they  given  ?  and  how  may  they  be 
used  in  subservience  to  their  original 
destination.?  what  is  the  original  creation 
of  them,  and  what  their  sinful  abuse  ?  for 
there  is  a  wide  difference  between  the 
original  purity  of  nature  and  its  corrup- 
tion, between  the  creator  and  perverter 
of  it."  Against  the  second  he  says,  "  Al- 
though no  express,  verbal  prohibition  of 
games  and  shows  is  found  in  Scripture, 
yet  it  contains  general  principles,  from 
which  this  prohibition  follows  as  a  matter 
of  course.  All  which  is  said  in  general 
terms  against  the  lust  of  the  flesh  and  of 
the  eyes,  must  be  applicable  also  to  this 
particular  kind  of  lust.  If  we  can  con- 
clude tliat  rage,  and  cruelty,  and  wrath 
are  permitted  to  us  in  Scripture,  we  are 
certainly  at  liberty  to  visit  the  amphi- 
theatre. Are  we  such  as  we  call  our- 
selves, and  shall  we  delight  ourselves  in 
witnessing  the  shedding  of  human  blood .?" 
Against  those  who  perverted  Scripture  in 
the  manner  above  mentioned,  the  author 
of  the  treatise  "De  Spectaculis,"  in  Cypri- 
an's writings  uses  the  following  language : 
"  I  may  safely  affirm  that  it  were  better  for 
such  men  never  to  know  the  Scriptures, 
than  so  to  read  them,  for  the  words  and 
examples,  placed  there  to  exhort  to  tlie 
virtues  of  the  Gospel,  they  pervert  to  the 
defence  of  vices;  for  this  was  written  to 
awaken  our  zeal  in  things  of  real  im- 
portance by  the  consideration,  that  the 
heathen  show  such  great  zeal  and  eager- 
ness in  trivial  things.  .  .  .  Reason  of  itself 
may  deduce  from  the  propositions  laid 
down  in  Scripture  those  consequences, 
which  are  not  themselves  expressly  un- 
folded.}* Let  every  man  take  counsel  of 
his  own  heart,  and  commune  with  the 
person  he  professes  to  be  as  a  Christian, 
and  lie  will  never  do  any  thing  unbecoming 
to  him,  for  the  conscience,  which  binds 
itself  to  none  but  itself,  will  always  have 
the  most  weight."| 


TertuUian  calls  upon  the  Christians  to 
compare  the  real  spiritual  pleasures,  which 
their  faith  gave  them  to  enjoy,  with  those 
false  pleasures  of  the  heathen  world,  (Ch. 
xxix.)  "Tell  me  then,  what  else  is  our 
desire,  than  that  which  was  also  the  wish 
of  the  apostle,  to  depart  out  of  the  world 
and  to  be  with  the  Lord.  There  is  thy 
pleasure,  whither  thy  wishes  ascend.  .  .  . 
Canst  thou  be  so  unthankful,  that  thou 
art  not  satisfied  with  the  many  and  great 
pleasures  which  the  Lord  hath  already 
bestowed  upon  thee,  and  acknowledgest 
them  not .'  For  what  is  a  subject  of  higher 
rejoicing  than  reconciliation  with  God, 
thy  Father  and  Lord,  than  the  revelation 
of  truth,  the  knowledge  of  error,  and  the 
remission  of  so  many  sins  already  com- 
mitted .''  What  can  be  a  greater  pleasure 
than  the  contempt  of  such  pleasures,  and 
the  contempt  of  the  whole  world  ;  or  than 
true  freedom,  a  pure  conscience,  and  a 
guiltless  life.?  what  pleasure  greater  than 
not  to  fear  death,  and  to  feel  that  thou 
mayest  trample  the  idols  of  the  heathen 
to  the  dust,  mayest  cast  out  evil  spirits, 
heal  sicknesses,  and  pray  for  revelations  .-* 
These  are  the  pleasures,  these  the  games 
of  the  Christian,  holy  and  eternal,  and 
such  as  no  man  can  buy  with  money.  .  .  . 
And  what,  too,  are  those  of  which  it  is  said, 
that  no  eye  hath  seen  them,  no  ear  heard 
them,  nor  hath  it  entered  into  the  heart  of 
man  to  conceive  them  .?"  The  author  also 
of  the  work  we  have  cited  as  found  in 
the  writings  of  Cyprian,  says — "  He  can 
never  look  with  wonder  on  the  works  of 
man,  who  hath  reckoned  himself  a  child 
of  God.  He  falls  down  from  his  high 
and  noble  pre-eminence,  who  looks  with 
wonder  at  any  thing  but  the  Lord.  Let 
the  believing  Christian  give  all  his  dili- 
gence to  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  there  he 
will  find  the  shows  of  faith,  shows  worthy 
to  be  looked  upon,  and  shows  such  as  he 
who  has  lost  his  eyesight  may  delight  in." 

When  Christians  renounced  even  being 
present  at  the  representation  of  these 
games  and  plays,  the  trade  of  an  actor 
must  of  course,  a  fortiori.^  have  been  for- 


*  The  treatise  "  de  Spectaculis"  in  Cyprian's 
■works. 

■j-  Ratio  docet,  qune  Scriptura  conticuit. 

i  Unusquisque  cum  persona  profcssionis  suas 
lOquatur  et  nihil  unquam  indecorum  geret.    Plus 


enim  ponderis  habebit  conscientia,  quae  nulli  se 
alteri  debebit,  nisi  sibi. 

*  In  this  enumeration,  which  in  its  higli  tone 
of  conscience  and  feeling,  speaks  the  Christian 
sentiments  of  these  early  ages  of  Christianity,  we 
may,  besides  the  general  Christian  spirit  which 
pervades  it,  remark  the  characteristic  spirit  of  Ter- 
tuUian— a  spirit  which  was  constantly  inclined  to 
I)lace  too  great  stress  on  individual  and  striking 
gifts  of  grace,  and  too  little  to  regard  what  is  said 
in  St.  Luke  x.  20,  and  1  Cor.  xiii.  1. 


SLAVERY  AMONG  THE  ANCIENTS. 


16;' 


bidden  to  them.  In  the  time  of  Cyprian 
the  case  had  occurred  in  the  North  Afri- 
can Church,  that  a  player,  although  a 
Christian,  wished  to  procure  his  living  by 
instructing  boys  in  the  art  which  he  him- 
self had  formerly  practised.  The  bishop 
Cyprian  was  asked  in  consequence  whe- 


the  brightest  feelings  of  man's  nobler 
nature  are  tarnished  and  stained  by  this 
defect,  (selfishness,)  so  we  find  its  traces 
even  in  the  political  spirit  of  freedom 
among  the  ancients,  although,  perhaps,  the 
marks  of  the  original  worth  of  man's 
nature  might  shine  through  this  spirit.    It 


iher  such  a  person  could  be  suflered  to  does,  however,  itself  bear  the  stamp  of  that 
belong  to  the  community,  and  he  ex-  j  selfishness,  by  which  every  thing,  which 
pressed  himself  most  strongly  against  it:  [  does  not  spring  out  of  man's  regenerate 
"  Since  it  is  forbidden,  iu  Deut.  xxii.  5,  j  nature,  is  debased.  The  zealous  friends 
to  a  man  to  dress  himself  in  woman's  ;  of  freedom  robbed  a  large  portion  of  their 
clothes,  and  a  curse  is  declared  against  I  fellow-men  of  that  which  they  thought  the 
any  one  who  does  this,*  how  far  more  I  greatest  of  blessings,  they  deprived  them 
wicked  must  it  seem  to  make  a  man  act  i  of  all  enjoyment  of  those  rights,  for  the 
the  part  of  a  woman  thus  immodestly,  to  possession  of  which,  in  regard  to  them- 
put  on  indecent  gestures,  and  to  falsify  i  selves,  they  were  so  jealous  and  anxious; 
God's  creatures  by  the  arts  of  the  devil  ?"  I  and  the  bitterest  enemies  of  slavery  were 
"  Suppose  such  an  one,"  continues  Cy-  I  perfectly  contented  to  dwell  surrounded 
prian,  "should  bring  forward  the  pretext  I  by  thousands  oflheir  fellow-creatures,  who 
of  poverty,  his  necessity  may  be  relieved,  served  them  as  slaves.  Their  zeal  for 
among  the  rest  whom  the  Church  main-  i  freedom,  which  ought  to  be  the  common 
tains,  provided  he  will  content  himself 
with  a  more  moderate  way  of  life,  indeed, 
but  an  innocent  one.    He  must  not,  how- 


ever, imagine  that  his  ceasing  to  sin  should 
be  bought  of  him  at  a  price,  because  he 
does  this,  not  for  our  sake,  but   for  his 


ssion  of  all  men  created  in  God's 
image,  limited  itself  entirely  within  the 
narrow  confines  of  their  native  country ; 
they  knew  of  the  rights  of  freedom  only 
as  the  rights  of  citizens,  and  not  as  the 
universal  rights  of  man ;  and  much  as  the 


ow-n If  the  Church,  where  he  live,  ■  condition  of  slaves  was  often  mitigated  bv 

is  too  poor  to  maintain  him,  let  him  come  civilization  and  morals,  yet  they  were 
to  Carthage;  here  he  may  receive  what  is  always  in  many  respects  treated  not  as 
needful  for  him  for  meat  and  raiment,  in  i  men,  but  as  things.  In  a  judicial  investi- 
order  that  he  may  not  teach  others,  who  ;  gation  all  the  cruelties  of  torture  might  be 
are  without  the  pale  of  the  Church,  what  I  used  upon  an  innocent  slave  ;  and  if  a  mas- 
is  criminal,  but  may  himself  learn  in  the  ,  terhad  been  murdered  by  one  of  his  slaves, 
Church  that  which  is  salutary.'"'!  j  according  to  the  Roman  law,  an  hundred 

Among  the  circumstances  foreign  to  its  of  the  slaves  who  were  in  his  service, 
nature,  which  Christianity  found  eslab-  I  although  their  innocence  was  as  clear  as 
lished  at  its  first  propagation,  was  the  ex-  |  day,  were  executed  with  the  murderer, 
istence  of  slavery.  As  the  natural  man,  i  Christianity  first  prepared  an  entire  change 
in  whom  selfishness  is  the  leading  princi-  [  in  these  circumstances,  because  it  taught 
pie,  impresses  on  every  thing  which  is  the  the  originally  equal  rights,  and  the  origi- 
ofFspring  of  man's  natural  condition,  his  |  nally  equal  destinies  of  all  men  created  in 
own  peculiar  stamp  and  character,  as  even  •  the  image  of  God,  and  because  it  repre- 
sented God  as  the  Father,  and  Christ  as 


*  It  was,  however,  it  must  be  remarked,  no 
uncommon  error  in  these  days  for  men  to  cite  iso- 
lated passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  a  work  in 
which  religious  and  political  regulations  are  so 
closely  interwoven,  and  apply  them  immediately 
and  unconditionally  to  the  Christian  Church,  with- 
out inquiring  whether  they  suited  the  peculiar  tem- 
per and  nature  of  the  economy  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, without  inquiring',  for  instjmce,  whether 
they  belonged  to  that  eternal  law,  which  was  not 


the  Redeemer  of  all  mankind,  and  every 
individual  as  an  immediate  object  of  God's 
providential  care.  Masters,  as  well  as 
slaves,  were  obliged  to  acknowledge  them- 
selves the  slaves  of  sin,  and  all  alike  to 
receive  their  deliverance  from  the  slavery 
of  sin,  the  true,  the  highest  free do?}i,  as  the 
gift  of  God's  free  grace.  Servants  and  mas- 
to  be  destroyed  but  fulfilled  by  the  Gospel.  Al-  j  ters,  by  becoming  believers,  were  mutually 
though,  however,  the  particular  law  here  mention-  bound  together  in  the  same  bond  of  an 
ed  no  longer  existed  as  a  positive  ordinance  in  |  heavenly  union,  destined  for  immortality, 
the  economy  of  the  New  Testament,  yet  it  is  easy  I  They  became  brethren  in  Christ— with 
to  perceive  that  the  moral  ground  of  the  prohibi-  ;  ^^,^^,j^  ^^^^^^  -^  ^^^-^^^^^  bondsman  nor  free- 
tion  still  contmued,  and  therefore,  the  law  might  ;  ,11  .  r  1      1 

still  be  appealed  to  and  put  in  force  anew.  man— they  became  members  of  one  body, 

t  Ep.  vi.  ad  Eucrat.     [Ep.  bci.  Ed.  Pam.  ii.   made  to  drink  of  one  Spirit,  and  heirs  of 
ed.  Ox.]  the  same  heavenly  possessions.     Servants 


166 


CHANGE     PRODUCED     FROM    WITHIN. 


often  became  the  instructors  of  their  mas- 
ters in  the  Gospel,  after  they  had  caused 
the  light  of  their  faith  to  shine  before  them 
in  their  narrow  earthly  sphere  ;*  and  mas- 
ters saw  in  their  servants  no  longer  their 
servants,  but  their  beloved  brethren  ;  they 
prayed  and  sang  together,  and  would  sit 
down  together  at  the  feasts  of  brotherly 
love,  and  together  receive  the  body  of  the 
Lord.  And  besides,  by  the  very  spirit  and 
practice  of  Christianity,  such  ideas  and 
feelings  were  naturally  engendered,  as  were 
utterly  inconsistent  with  this  institution 
of  slavery,  however  well  it  might  corres- 
pond to  the  then  established  notions. 
Christianity  would  necessarily  introduce 
a  wish  that  all  men  should  be  placed  in 
those  circumstances,  in  which  theyvv^ould 
be  the  least  hindered  in  the  free  and  inde- 
pendent use  of  their  spiritual  and  moral 
powers  according  to  the  will  of  God :  and 
thus  St.  Paul  says  to  tlie  servant,  (Cor. 
vii.  21,)  "  [f  thou  mayest  be  made  free, 
use  it  rather."  Nevertheless,  Christianity 
never  began  by  external  changes  and  alter- 
ations :  for  these,  wherever  they  did  not 
begin  from  the  inward  man,  and  there  fix 
their  first  and  firm  foundation,  would 
always  have  failed  in  their  salutary  de- 
signs. The  new  creation,  which  it  pro- 
duced, was  in  all  respects  an  inward  one, 
from  which  all  outward  effects,  in  their 
whole  compass  and  extent,  were  to  flow, 
at  first  by  degrees,  and  therefore,  with 
more  certainty  and  greater  benefit.  It  left 
external  relations  to  exist  for  a  time  as 
they  were,  but  by  infusing  into  them  a  new 
spirit,  it  prepared  their  complete  reforma- 
tion, by  its  internal  eflijcts  on  men's  minds. 
It  first  gave  to  the  slave  that  true  and  in- 
ward freedom,  witliout  which  all  earthly 
and  bodily  freedom  is  but  a  name,  and 
which,  wherever  it  exists,  no  earthly  bond, 
no  earthly  yoke,  can  overwhelm  and  sub- 
due. St.  Paul  .says,  "  He  that  is  called  in 
the  Lord,  while  he  is  a  servant,  is  the 
Lord's  freeman."  Tertullian,  in  showing 
how  far  exalted  this  heavenly  freedom  is 
above  the  earthly,  says,t  "  In  the  world, 
those  who  have  received  their  freedom, 
are  crowned.   But  thy  freedom  has  already 


*  The  example  of  Onesimus  was  often  repeated. 
Tertullian  appeals  to  cases  where  a  master,  who 
havin?  patiently  put  up  with  the  former  crimes  of 
a  servant,  when  he  found  him  quite  reformed,  but 
at  the  same  time  heard  that  this  reformation  was 
owing  to  Christianity,  sent  him  to  the  house  of 
correction,  out  of  i)ure  hatred  to  Christianity. 
Apologet.  c-  iii.,  "Servum  jam  fideleni  dominus 
dim  initis  ab  oculis  relegavit." 

f  De  Corona  Militis,  c.  xiii. 


been  bought  by  Christ,  and  bought,  too, 
very  dear.  How  can  the  world  give  free- 
dom to  him,  who  is  already  the  servant  of 
another .'  All  in  the  world  is  appearance 
only,  and  nothing  reality.  For  then  thou 
wast  free  in  regard  to  men,  as  one  bought 
by  Christ ;  and  now  thou  art  a  servant  of 
Christ,  although  set  free  by  a  man.  If 
thou  dost  esteem  the  freedom  which  the 
world  can  give  thee  a  real  freedom,  thou 
art  again  become  by  this  a  slave  to  men, 
and  hast  lost  the  freedom  bestowed  on 
thee  by  Christ,  because  thou  esteemest  it 
a  slavery."  One  of  the  imperial  slaves, 
named  Euelpistus,  being  conducted  before 
the  tribunal  with  Justin  Martyr  and  other 
Christians,  spoke  thus :  "  I  also  am  a 
Christian,  and  I  have  received  freedom 
through  Christ,  and  through  his  grace  I 
partake  in  the  same  hope."*  The  servant 
v/as  to  turn  his  state  of  service  into  free- 
dom by  serving  his  master  for  the  sake 
of  God,  with  a  free  heart  and  spirit — by 
recognising  in  his  spirit  God  alone  as  his 
master,  who  placed  him  in  this  state,  and 
by  keeping  Him  before  his  eyes — by  seek- 
ing, with  a  faithful  heart,  the  advantage 
of  his  earthly  master,  rendering  him  due 
service  and  obedience,  without  the  fear  of 
man,  in  all  things  which  did  not  contra- 
vene the  laws  of  God,  and  ceasing  to  obey 
him,  where  the  commands  of  men  were 
against  the  laws  of  God.  If  an  earthly 
condition,  which  suited  his  destination  as 
a  man,  and  his  calling  as  a  Christian,  bet- 
ter were  offered  to  a  Christian,  he  was  to 
accept  it  Avith  joy.  St.  Paul  says,  "  Art 
thou  called,  being  a  servant .?  care  not  for 
it,  but  if  thou  mayest  he  made  free,  use  it 
rather?''  But  if  this  choice  were  not 
given  to  him,  the  Christian  was  not  to 
boast  of  his  rights,  or  lift  himself  up,  as  a 
Christian,  above  his  heathen  master,  but 
in  the  spirit  of  self-sacrificing  love,  of  hu- 
mility, and  self-denial,  which  animated 
him,  he  was  to  let  the  light  of  his  Chris- 
tianity sliine  before  his  earthly  master, 
that  he  might  win  him  for  the  common 
Lord  and  Master  of  all  in  heaven.  Irenajus, 
bishop  of  Antioch,  writes  thus  to  Polycarp, 
bishop  of  Smyrna,  (ch.  iv.,)  '■'•  Be  not  proud 
towards  servants  and  maidens,  but  at  the 
same  time  they  must  not  exalt  themselves, 
but  serve  with  more  zeal  to  the  honour  of 
God,  that  they  may  receive  that  higher 
freedom  at  the  hands  of  God.  They  must 
not  expect  their  freedom  to  be  bought  by 
the  Church,  lest  they  should  be  found  the 
servants  of  their  own  lusts." 


*  Acta  Mart.  Justini. 


IMITATION    OF    CHRIST. 


16- 


Another  question,  on  which  men's 
opinions  were  divided,  was  this  :  Whether 
a  Christian  could  conscientiously  accept 
a  magisterial  or  a  military  office,  and  es- 
pecially with  regard  to  the  latter.  As  the 
heathen  state  religion  was  so  closely  in- 
terwoven with  all  the  relations  of  political 
and  social  life,  all  such  olficos  would  be 
likely  to  produce  cases,  in  which  a  man 
could  not  avoid  partaking  in  the  ceremo- 
nies of  the  heathen  religion.  All  Chris- 
tians, on  this  view  of  the  question,  pro- 
claimed with  one  voice,  that  no  necessity 
could  ever  excuse  this,  hi  this  respect, 
what  Teitullian  says  is  certainly  spoken 
from  the  hearts  of  all  Christians  :  "Christ 
never  changes.  There  is  one  Gospel  and 
one  Jesus,  who  will  deny  all  who  deny 
Him,  and  confess  all  who  confess  God  ; 
with  Him  the  believing  citizen  (paganus) 
is  a  soldier  of  the  Lord,  and  the  soldier 
has  the  same  duties  to  perform  as  the 
citizen."* 

But  the  question,  whether  a  Christian, 
supposing  his  faith  not  compromised,  was 
at  liberty  to  accept  such  an  office,  was 
quite  a  distinct  one,  and  was  answered  in 
the  affirmative  by  one  party,  and  in  the 
negative  by  another.  The  question  must 
he  carefully  considered,  with  a  due  regard 
to  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Church 
was  then  placed.  The  prevailing  idea  of 
the  Christian  life  was  this  :  to  follow  a 
Redeemer,  who  had  entered  the  world  in 
poverty  and  low  estate,  and  had  hidden 
his  glory  under  the  form  of  a  servant — to 
follow  Him  in  humility,  in  self-denial,  and 
in  renunciation  of  every  thing  earthly. 
The  Christian's  glory  was  in  heaven  with 
his  Saviour;  in  his  earthly  appearance, 
that  which  was  utterly  devoid  of  authority 
and  splendour,  and  most  like  the  appear- 
ance of  his  Saviour,  was  most  befitting. 
He  depised  the  power  and  the  glory  of 
this  world,  while  he  felt  himself  exalted 
by  the  consciousness  of  partaking  in  the 
power  and  glory  of  a  far  dilferent  one. 
But,  then,  this  renunciation  of  earthly 
things  consisted  in  the  state  of  the  mind, 
and  the  affections  of  this  might  remain  the 


*  De  Corona  Militis,  c.  xi.  "  A  pud  hunc  tarn 
miles  est,  paganus  fiJelis,  quam  paganus,  miles  in- 
fKleiis."  I  have  here  translated  as  if  the  reading 
were  "  fidelis,"  for  which  emendation,  what  Ter- 
tullian  had  before  said  of  "  fides  pagana,"  gives 
some  authority.  The  common  reading  may,  how- 
ever, may  be  taken  in  the  following  sense :  "  The 
faithless  soldier,  he  who  violates  the  duties  of  Chris- 
tian fidelity,  is  to  him  as  a  '  paganus'  in  regard  to 
his  militia ;  he  is  one  excluded  from  the  order  of 
the  '  milites  Christi,'  the  duties  of  which  he  has 
violated." 


same  under  outward  circumstances  of  very 
different  complexions ;  and  the  outioard 
possession  of  earthly  property,  and  of 
earthly  splendour,  when  a  man's  condition 
and  circumstances  required  it,  and  the  use 
of  earthly  power  and  might  in  an  earthly 
calling,  M'as  not  necessarily  prohibited ; 
all  this  might  and  ought  to  be  sanctified 
by  means  of  Christianity.  But  it  was 
natural  that  the  Christians,  in  the  first 
warmth  of  their  conversion,  should  not 
make  these  distinctions  between  outward 
and  imoard,  and  that  they  should  be  in- 
clined to  conceive  in  an  outward  manner 
the  necessity  of  imitating  a  Lord,  who 
had  appeared  in  the  form  of  a  servant ;  it 
was  natural,  that  in  their  first  ardour  they 
should  willingly  cast  away  from  them  all 
those  earthly  things,  which  they  saw 
serving  the  purposes  of  heathen  corrup- 
tion, and  reject  earthly  might  and  glory, 
which  they  saw  so  often  opposed  to  the 
will  of  God.*  Under  this  point  of  view 
TertuUian  says,  (de  Idololatria,  c.  xviii.:) 
"  Thou,  as  a  Christian,  must  follow  the 
model  of  thy  Lord ;  he,  the  Lord,  came 
in  humility  and  low  estate  ;  he  was  with- 
out any  fixed  habitation ;  'for  the  Son  of 
man,'  says  he,  '  hath  not  where  to  lay  his 
head :'  he  came  clad  in  the  garb  of  po- 
verty, for  otherwise  he  would  not  have 
said,  *•  Behold,  they  that  wear  soft  clothing 
are  in  king's  houses,'  and  he  came  with- 
out beauty  or  comeliness  of  appearance, 
as  Isaiah  foretold,  (ch.  iii.)  If  he  would 
not  even  once  exercise  the  rights  of  do- 
minion over  his  own,  for  whom  he  per- 
formed the  most  menial  service,  if  he, 
fully  conscious  as  he  was  of  his  regal 
power,  yet  shrunk  from  being  made  a 
king,  he  gave  a  perfect  example  to  all  his 
disciples,  to  avoid  all  which  is  high  and 
glorious  in  earthly  rank  and  power.  For 
who  had  a  better  title  to  make  use  of  these 
things  than  the  Son  of  God  .'  What  fasces, 
and  how  many  of  them,  would  lie  iiave 
made  to  precede  hini !  what  purple  would 
have  flowed  from  his  shoulders!  what 
gold  would  have  gleamed  from  his  head  ! 
had  he  not  declared  that  the  glory  of  the 
world  benefited  neither  him  nor  his.  He 
condemned  also  that  which  he  rejected."!" 
Many  Christians  also  imagined,  with  a 


*  Hence,  the  heathen  in  Minucius Felix,  c.  viii., 
describes  the  Christians  as  men  who,  while  they 
were  themselves  half  naked,  despised  honours  and 
purple  robes.  "  Honores  et  purpuras  despiciunt 
ipsi  seminudi." 

f  (Gloriam  soculi)  <quam  damnavit  in  pompa 
diaholi  deputavit."  These  are  the  words  of  'J'er- 
tullian,  one  of  the  most  violent  advocates  of  these 


168 


THE    STATE   AND    CHRISTIANITY    OPPOSED. 


conscientiousness  which,  abstractedly  con- 
sidered, always  deserves  our  admiration, 
that  passages  like  Matt.  v.  39,  were  to  be 
interpreted  literally.  This  arose  from  not 
CQusidering  that  the  passages  in  question 
chiefly  related  to  the  disposition  of  the 
lieart,  and  that  their  object  was  to  banish 
all  thirst  for  revenge  from-  the  hearts  of 
men,  so  that  love  alone  might  reign  there, 
although  even  love  itself  is  often  obliged 
to  inflict  pain,  for  a  season,  on  the  very 
objects  whose  real  advantage  it  is  seeking. 
Their  Christian  feelings  would  not  allow 
them  to  suffer  themselves  to  become  the 
instrument  of  another's  pain,  and  to  assist 
in  the  execution  oi  the  laic,  where  a  spirit 
of  severe  justice,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
spirit  of  mercy  and  love,  was  the  leading 
and  the  animating  principle.* 

Christians,  under  the  then  existing  cir- 
cumstances, were  generally  accustomed 
to  consider  the  state  as  a  power  hostile  to 
the  Church,  and  it  was  far  from  their 
imagination  to  conceive  it  possible  that 
Christianity  should  appropriate  to  itself 
also  the  relations  and  offices  of  the  state.j 
The  Christians  stood  aloof  and  distinct 
from  the  state,  as  a  priestly  and  spiritual 
race,  and  Christianity  seemed  able  to  in- 
fluence civil  life  only  in  that  manner 
which,  it  must  be  confessed,  is  the  purest, 
by  practically  endeavouring  to  instil  more 
and  more  of  holy  feeling  into  the  citizens 
of  the  state.  When  Celsus  required  that 
the  Christians  should  take  up  arms  for  the 
protection  of  the  rights  of  the  emperor, 
and  fight  in  his  armies,  Origen  answered, 
"  We  do,  in  fact  render  the  emperor  Divine 
assistance,  by  putting  on  the  Divine  ar- 
mour, in  which  we  follow  the  command 
of  the  apostle,  1  Tim.  ii.  1.  And  the 
more  pious  any  man  is,  the  more  able  is 


opinions,  it  must  be  confessed,  and  a  writer  with 
whom  they  appear  carried  to  the  very  extreme,  as 
well  as  every  thing  else,  which  seized  upon  his 
mind  and  animated  him. 

*  'I'ertullian,  in  treating  on  this  subject,  first 
separates  those  cases  in  which  a  Christian  cannot, 
under  any  circumstances,  administer  a  magisterial 
ofllcc.  "  Jam  vero  quas  sunt  potestatis,  neque  ju- 
dicet  de  capitc  alicujus  vcl  pudorc,  feras  enim  de 
pecunia,  neminem  vinciat,  ncminem  recludat  aut 
torqueat,  si  hccc  credibile  est  fieri  posse."  The 
Council  of  Elvira,  canon  56,  ordained,  that  no 
magistrate  should  be  allowed  to  visit  the  Cliurch 
during  any  year  in  which  he  had  to  preside  as 
Decemvir  over  cases  of  life  and  death. 

•j-  How  little  Tertullian  imagined  that  the  em- 
pf^rors  themselves  would  ever  be  Christians,  m.iy 
iifc  judged  of  from  the  following  expressions,  Apo- 
loget.  c.  xxi.,  "  iScd  et  Ca;sares  credidisbcnt  super 
Christo,  si  aut  Ciesares  rion  essent  steculo  neces- 
earii  out  ei  et  Christian!  potuissent  esse  Csesares." 


he  to  render  the  emperor  a  more  eflectual 
assistance  than  the  ordinary  soldiers.  We 
may  also  use  the  following  argument  with 
tlie  heathen :  '  Your  priests  keep  their 
hands  pure,  that  they  may  be  able  to  offer 
the  accustomed  sacrifices  to  the  gods, 
with  hands  unstained  with  blood,  and  you 
do  not  compel  your  priests,  even  in  times 
of  war  and  difficulty  to  take  the  field. 
Their  duty  is,  as  priests  of  God,  to  com-  ' 
bat  by  prayer  for  those  who  are  waging  a 
just  war,  and  for  the  lawful  emperor,  in 
order  that  all  which  opposes  those  that 
have  right  on  their  side  may  be  annihila- 
ted. Tlie  Christians  render  greater  service 
to  their  country  than  other  men,  inasmuch 
as  they  instruct  the  citizens,  and  teach 
them  to  become  pious  towards  God,  on 
whom  the  welfare  of  cities  depends,  and 
who  receives  those  whose  conduct  in  a 
poor  and  miserable  city  has  been  good, 
into  a  divine  and  heavenly  city."*  When 
Celsus  argued  that  the  Christians  ought 
to  undertake  the  duties  of  the  magistracy 
in  their  native  country,  Origen  replied, 
"  But  we  know  that  in  every  city  we  have 
another  country,  whose  foundations  are 
in  the  word  of  God,  and  we  require  it 
from  those  who  are  competent  by  their 
talent  and  pious  lives,  to  take  upon  them- 
selves the  offices  requisite  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  order  in  the  Churches." 

Those,  on  the  contrary,  who  deter- 
mined that  it  was  allowable  for  a  Chris- 
tian to  accept  civil  and  military  offices, 

*  A  few  critical  remarks  are  necessary  to  esta- 
blish the  propriety  of  the  translation  here  given  of 
this  passage,  which  is  taken  from  the  eighth  Book 
of  Origen,  against  Celsus.  In  the  words  of  Origen 
the  reading  ii;  tov  T6X<s5t  flssv  appears  to  be  the  gen- 
uine, and  lU  rov  Tcev  o^aiv  Smv  a  false  reading.  It  is 
easy  to  understand  how  the  predicate  contained  m 
the  former  reading,  which  is  very  unusual  in  a 
Christian's  mouth,  should  be  changed  into  the  lat- 
ter, which  is  common  enough ;  but  a  change  "  vice 
versa"  is  difficult  to  be  accounted  for.  There  is, 
however,  nothing  to  startle  us  in  Origen,  even  from 
a  Christian  point  of  view,  calling  God  mxiaj;.  as  a 
comparison  with  Z«uc  ttoxisj;  was  before  his  eyes. 
The  word  ttcmcj  so  often  repeated  in  this  passage, 
speaks  for  this  play  on  words.  If  we  take  this 
reading,  the  play  on  words  further  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  we  ought  to  read  dvxKct/A^dinvTa  instead 
of  uv«xa^(S:<V'JVTK. 

[This  passage  is  considerably  abridged  from  the 
original ;  it  appears  to  me  that  this  abridgment 
has  slightly  altered  the  turn  of  the  passage  in  one 
sentence,  although  the  general  sense  is  adhered  to. 
I  mean  the  passage  beginning,  "  Their  duty," 
which  I  have  translated  from  the  German  and  not 
from  the  Greek.  In  the  original  this  sentence  ap- 
pears to  me  to  apply  to  the  Christians,  not  to  the 
heathen  priests.  The  passage  is  taken  from  B.  viii. 
ch.  73,  74.  ed.  De  la  Kue.— H.  J.  R.] 


CHRISTIANITY    OPPOSED    TO    EXTREMES. 


169 


supported  their  opinion  by  examples  out 
of  the  Old  Testament.  A  just  and  ob- 
vious answer  in  this  case  was,  that  we 
are  not  at  liberty  to  conclude  that  every 
thing,  which  was  consonant  to  the  nature 
of  the  dispensation  of  the  Old  Testament, 
would  also  suit  the  nature  of  tliat  of  the 
New.*  Even  when  it  was  advanced,  that 
John  the  Baptist  had  not  commanded  the 
soldiers,  who  came  to  him,  to  give  up 
their  profession,  but  had  prescribed  rules 
for  tliem  to  practice  it  in  a  manner  agree- 
able to  God,  it  might  be  alleged  in  reply, 
that  John  had  stood  only  on  the  limit  be- 
tween the  old  and  the  new  dispensation. 
But  when  they  appealed  to  the  case  of 
the  centurion,  whose  faith  Christ  himself 
had  praised,  (Luke  vii.,)  and  of  the  believ- 
ing Cornelius,  their  adversaries  had  more 
reason  to  acknowledge  the  weight  of  their 
appeal,  and  even  TertuUian  himself,  the 
warm  opponent  of  tlie  profession  of  arms 
among  Christians,  did  not  feel  himself 
authorised  altogether  to  condemn  those 
who,  having  become  Christians  while 
they  wece  soldiers,  continued  in  their  old 
profession,  provided  it  was  unattended 
with  any  thing  which  caused  them  to 
violate  their  fidelity  as  Christians.!  Many 
also  argued  against  the  propriety  of  Chris- 
tians becoming  soldiers,  from  Matt.  xxvi. 
52,  considering  that  Avhen  our  Saviour 
commanded  Peter  to  put  the  sword  into 
the  sheath,  He  had  given  the  same  com- 
mand to  all  Christians,!  although  this 
passage,  when  taken  with  the  context, 
can  be  considered  as  opposed  only  to  an 
unauthorised  taking  up  of  arms,  and  as 
meant  to  reprove  the  self-willed  spirit  of 
man,  which  is  desirous  of  furthering  by 
means  of  outward  might  the  cause  of 
God,  which  God  alone  is  capable  of  con- 
ducting by  his  word  and  Spirit. 

Christianity  was  destined  by  its  peculiar 
nature  to  conduct  human  life  between  two 
extremes,  a  vain  devotion  to  the  world,  and 
a  gloomy  and  proud  contempt  of  it.  The 
centre  and  the  fundamental  doctrine  of 
Christianity,  the  doctrine  of  redemption, 
here  also  stamped  its  peculiar  spirit  and 
character  upon  the  Christian  life.  The  re- 
deemed no  longer  belonged  to  himself,  but 
to  his  Redeemer :  in  his  inward  life  he  had 
departed  out  of  the  world,  as  far  as  the 


*  TertuUian,  <lc  Iilololatria,  c.  xviii.  "  Scito 
non  semper  comparanda  esse  vctera  et  nova,  riulia 
et  polita,  cnnpta  et  applicita,  servilia  et  liberalia." 

t  Tertull.  do  ('orona  Militis,  c.  xi. 

t  TertuUian,  de  Idololatria,  c.  xix.  "Omnem 
postca  militem  Dominus  in  Petro  exarmando  dis- 
cinxit." 

22 


world  is  opposed  to  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  his  conversation  was  to  be  in  heaven, 
riis  whole  life  must,  therefore,  receive  a 
new  complexion  \  it  was  to  be  a  sacrifice  of 
thaidisgiving  for  the  grace  of  redemption, 
and  consecrated  to  God  under  the  influence 
of  the  Redeemer's  Spirit.  With  tliese  feel- 
ings was  the  Christian  bound  to  use  and  to 
enjoy  every  thing  he  did  enjoy,  and  these 
feelings  were  to  sanctify  all  the  ways  and 
all  the  pleasures  of  the  citizen  of  heaven, 
while  his  fleshly  abode  was  still  in  the 
world.  Among  the  heathen,  the  feeling 
which  stood  contrasted  with  a  reckless 
enjoyment  of  all  that  youth  and  fresh- 
ness can  find  to  gratify  their  desires,  was 
a  mournful  acknowledgement  of  the  fleet- 
ing nature  of  the  world, — that  melancholy, 
which  having  found  the  nothingness  of 
all  on  earth,  abandons  itself  to  despair, 
or  sinks  into  cold  resignation,  and  flies 
enjoyments  so  deceitful,  and  a  world, 
whose  false  pleasures  are  so  seducing 
and  delusive,  with  lofty  contempt ;  or 
with  the  despair  of  one  who,  having 
found  that  all  below  is  fleeting  and  false, 
has  nothing  real  and  abiding,  wherewith 
to  replace  it.  On  the  one  hand,  a  lawless 
life  of  wild  and  reckless  enjoyment; — on 
the  other,  a  life  under  the  burden  of  the 
law,  where  the  law  has  evoked  the  con- 
sciousness of  guilt,  and  man,  pursued  by 
the  feeling  of  impurity  and  guilt,  carries 
this  feeling  into  every  thing  around  him, 
a  life  where  to  the  impure  all  things  are 
impure !  To  one  in  this  state,  all  nature 
j  appeared  unclean,  all  its  enjoyments  de- 
'  filing,  and  sense  and  matter  the  seat  of 
evil.  On  the  one  hand,  stood  the  spirit 
j  of  polytheism,  deifying  all  the  powers  of 
I  nature,  and,  under  their  influence,  with 
\  fresh  and  vigorous  feelings  abandoning 
I  itself  to  all  the  pleasures  which  the  na- 
I  tural  life  is  capable  of  deriving  from  indi- 
{  vidual  objects, — on  the  other,  the  dark, 
,  proud  spirit  of  pantheism,  despising  all 
that  is  individual,  together  with  all  the 
energies  and  pleasures  which  are  derived 
'  from  it,  as  mere  false  appearances,  as  a 
\  delusion  which  carries  man  away  captive, 
and  as  a  narrow  limit  which  cramps  his 
:  views, — a  spirit  which  only  sought  by 
serious  abstract  contemplation  to  unite 
itself  with  that  one  substantive  Being, 
which  hides  itself  under  the  deceitful 
guise  of  these  individualities.  The  first 
was  certainly  the  prevailing  spirit  in  the 
Roman  and  Grecian  heathenism;  but, 
nevertheless,  as  tlie  youthful  life  of  the 
old  world  was  daily  waning  away,  as 
every  thing  grew  old  and  died,  the  latter 


170 


CHRISTIANITY    OPPOSED    TO    EXTREMES. 


spirit  constantly  gained  ground  ;  and  be- 
sides this,  during  these  times  of  power- 
ful spiritual  excitement,  and  lively  inter- 
course between  the  Western  World  and 
the  distant  East,  the  theosophic  and  as- 
cetic spirit  of  the  latter  had  extended 
itself  also  widely  over  the  West.  Chris- 
tianity, on  the  contrary,  universally  raised 
up  a  new  life  out  of  death,  and  only 
killed,  in  order  that  a  nobler  life  might 
have  power  to  rise  up.  As  soon  as  it 
had  brought  man  to  the  consciousness, 
that  the  source  of  evil  and  impurity  was 
not  without,  that  it  was  not  to  be  sought 
in  nature,  or  in  sense  and  matter,  but 
in  his  own  inward  heart,  in  sin ;  that 
to  the  impure  all  things  are  impure,  and 
to  the  pure  all  things  are  pure ;  and  as 
soon  as  it  had  freed  him  from  this  op- 
pressive consciousness  of  guilt  and  un- 
cleanness,  bv  faith  in  the  Redeemer,  it 
restored  to  him  the  universal  range  of 
nature,  as  a  purified  and  ennobled  temple 
of  God,  where  the  redeemed  must  glorify 
his  God  The  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  of 
which  St,  Paul  speaks,  are  not  a  dark 
and  haughty  moodiness,  but  love,  joy, 
and  friendship.  It  is  joy  in  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  which  he  appeals  so  often,  as 
the  characteristic  of  the  Christian  life. 

As  Christianity  opposed  a  thoughtless 
thirst  for  pleasure  with  a  holy  serious- 
ness, so  also  it  opposed  to  that  ascetic 
self-righteousness,  that  dark  and  proud 
contempt  of  the  world,  the  spirit  of  hu- 
mility and  the  childlike  feeling  of  delight 
in  the  grace  of  our  heavenly  Father, 
which  receives  with  thankfulness  all  his 
gifts,  even  those  of  an  eartlily  nature,  as 
tokens  of  eternal  love.  The  Christian 
was  not  to  escape  out  of  this  corrupted 
world,  but  he  received  a  call,  by  means 
of  the  spirit  which  animated  him,  as  a 
light,  as  salt,  and  as  leaven,  to  contribute 
his  share  towards  the  general  renovation 
of  human  nature,  and  of  the  human  race. 

It  was,  we  must  avow,  natural  enough, 
that  to  the  heathen,  who  delighted  in 
the  pleasures  of  the  world,  Christianity 
should  seem  a  gloomy  and  dark  religion, 
and  Christians  appear  as  a  race  of  men 
who  abhorred  the  light,  and,  having  ut- 
terly died  to  the  world,  were  no  longer 
useful  in  it.*     (See  above,  p.  86.)     But 


*  In  Minucius  Felix,  c.  8,  the  heathen  calls  the 
Christians  "lalc^brosa  et  hicifutja  natio;"  and  cer- 
tainly amon^  the  heathen,  the  frivolous  man  of 
pleasure,  or  the  man  of  the  worM,  who  was  ac- 
customed to  comply  on  the  easiest  terms  with  the 
demands  of  reliction,  and  thought  a  few  outward 
ceremonies  and  a  few  good  works  were  amply  suf- 


TertuUian  thus  answers  these  accusa- 
tions against  the  Christians,  Apologet.  c. 
xliii.,  "  How  can  such  an  accusation  lie 
against  those  who  live  among  you,  who 
share  the  same  fare  with  you,  and  the 
same  clothing,  and  have  the  same  com- 
mon wants  of  life  ?  For  we  are  no 
Brahmins,  nor  hidian  Gymnosophists  ; 
we  are  no  dwellers  in  the  woods,  no  men 
who  have  left  the  common  haunts  of  life  ; 
we  feel  deeply  the  gratitude  we  owe  to 
God,  our  Lord  and  Creator;  we  despise 
not  the  enjoyment  of  any  of  his  works ; 
we  only  desire  to  moderate  this  enjoy- 
ment in  such  a  manner,  that  we  may 
avoid  excess  and  misuse.  We,  therefore, 
inhabit  this  world  in  common  with  you, 
and  we  make  use  of  baths,  of  shops, 
workshops,  and  fairs,  and  all  that  is  used 
in  the  intercourse  of  life.  We  also  carry 
on,  in  common  with  you,  navigation,  wary 
agriculture,  and  trade  ;  we  take  part  in 
your  occupations,  and  our  labour,  when 
needful,  we  give  to  the  public  service."* 
Still,  although  Christians  did  not  by  any 
means  retire  from  the  business  of  life,  yet 
they  were  accustomed  to  devote  many 
separate  days  peculiarly  to  examining  their 
own  hearts,  and  pouring  them  out  before 
God,  while  they  dedicated  their  life  anew 
to  Him  with  uninterrupted  prayers,  in 
order  that  they  might  again  return  to  their 
ordinary  occupations,  with  a  renovated 
spirit  of  zeal  and  seriousness,  and  with 
renewed  powers  of  sanctification.  These 
days  of  holy  devotion,  days  of  prayer 
and  penitence,  which  individual  Christians 
appointed  for  themselves  according  to 
tlieir  individual  necessities,  were  often  a 
kind  of  fastdays.  In  order  that  their  sen- 
sual feelings  might  less  distract  and  im- 
pede the  occupation  of  their  heart  with  its 
holy  contemplations,  they   were   accus- 

ficient,  must  have  thought  Christianity  a  kind  of 
pietism,  a  religion  carried  to  excess,  "  immodica 
siiperstitio,  nimium  pietatis."  In  a  monumental 
inscription  at  Lyons,  quoted  by  Gilbert  Burnet,  in 
the  first  of  his  letters,  a  lieathen  husband  says  of 
his  Christian  wife,  that  she  had  become  impious 
by  becoming  too  pious,  'quajdum  nimia  pia  fuit, 
facta  est  impia.' 

*  A  passage  of  Irenjeus,  where  he  speaks  of 
their  dependence  on  the  heathen,  under  whom 
they  lived,  in  respect  of  maintenance,  will  show 
how  foreign  to  the  notions  of  Christians  in  general 
was  that  monkery,  which  grew  up  in  later  days. 
It  occurs,  lib.  iv.  c.  .30.  "  Etcnim,  si  is,  qui  tibi  hrcc 
imputabat,  scparatuscst  a  gentilium  coetu,  et  nihil 
est  alicnorum  apud  cum.sed  est  simpliciter  nudus, 
et  nudis  pedibus  et  sine  domo  in  montibus  convcr- 
satur,  quemadmodum  aliquot  ex  his  animalibus, 
quae    herbiS   vescuntur:    veniam  merebitur,   ideo 


ORIGIN     AND     EFFECTS     OF     ASCETICISM. 


171 


tomed  Q^n  these  days  to  limit  their  corpo- 
real wants  more  than  usual,  or  to  fast  en- 
tirely. In  the  consideration  of  this,  we 
must  not  overlook  the  peculiar  nature  of 
that  hot  climate  in  which  Christianity 
was  first  promulgated.  That  which  was 
spared  by  their  abstinence  on  these  days, 
was  applied  to  the  support  of  the  poorer 
brethren.  There  were  also  many  who,  in 
the  first  warmth  of  zeal,  at  their  baptism, 
made  over  to  the  Church  chest,  or  to  the 
poor,  a  large  portion  of  their  earthly  pro- 
perty, or  sometimes  all  that  they  had,  be- 
cause they  felt  themselves  bound  to  de- 
clare, with  all  their  power,  their  contempt 
of  earthly  things,  by  which  their  hearts 
had  till  now  been  enslaved,  and  to  declare 
again  with  all  their  power  what  their  heart 
was  now  full  of,  their  cheerful  readiness 
to  ofi'er  and  to  sacrifice  all  they  possessed 
to  their  Saviour,  that  they  might  win  his 
heavenly  crown.  They  felt  as  if  the 
Lord  hud  said  to  each  of  them,  "  If  thou 
wilt  be  perfect,  go  and  sell  that  thou  hast, 
and  give  to  tlie  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have 
treasure  in  heaven,  and  come  and  follow 
me.'"  They  led,  in  the  midst  of  the  com- 
munity, a  quiet  retired  life,  maintained 
themselves  by  the  labour  of  their  hands, 
and  remained  unmarried,  that  undistracted 
by  worldly  cares,  they  might  devote 
themselves  to  prayer  and  to  the  study  of 
Scripture,  to  holy  contemplations,  and  to 
endeavours  after  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
And  what  they  could  spare  from  the  pro- 
duce of  their  labour,  living  on  the  lowest 
possible  allowance  of  the  poorest  food, 
they  applied  again  to  the  purposes  of 
Christian  charity.  Such  persons  were 
called  the  ahstincnt^  the  zealous  aspirants 
after  Christian  perfection^  "  continentes," 
a.ay.ma.1,.*  There  were  besides  many  who 
from  childhood,  by  means  of  a  pious 
Christian  education,  were  filled  with  so 
deep  a  love  of  the  Divine  nature,  that  they 
desired  as  far  as  possible  to  loosen  all 
their  earthly  ties.  People  of  this  descrip- 
tion were  found  in  both  sexes,  and  the 
females  were  especially  called  wa^Ge^o*, 
"  virgines."t     Among  the  heathen  them- 

*  Aj-ks/v,  ua-Kurn;.  These  were  common  words 
at  that  time  among  heathens  and  Christians  alike, 
to  denote  particular  exercises  and  practices  of  a 
moral  tendency. 

■\  Tertulliaii  speaks  of  these,  de  Cullu  Foemin. 
lib,  ii.  c.  9.  "Aliqui  abstinentes  vino  et  animali- 
bus  esculentis,  multi  se  spadonatui  obsignant 
propter  rognum  Dei."     And  Justin  Martyr  also, 

Apol.  ii.,  TTO.KOt  TlfK  K-U  7nK>M  6^))JtiVTCUTC<    H'U  ifiSo- 

u<pi:^oi  Jiu/jti/ou3-i.      This  passage,  however,  will  by 
no  moans  bear  us  out  in  saying  that  all  of  these 


selves,  "  philosopher  and  ascetic"  were 
kindred*  ideas,  and  from  them  this  same 
connection  of  ideas,  and  this  same  sort  of 
expression,  passed  over  to  the  Christians, 
whom  it  particularly  suited  to  refer  the 
name  of  philosophy  to  a  system  of  prac- 
tice: and  in  later  times,  therefore,  the 
name  of  (piMa-o^m  was  given  to  monkery. 
Jt  was  in  part  tiie  case  that  some  of  these 
heathen  ascetics,  being  led  to  Christianity 
by  their  serious  endeavours  after  moral 
perfection,  continued  their  former  habits 
of  life  after  their  conversion,  because  they 
contained  nothing,  which  necessarily  of 
itself  and  by  itself  was  repugnant  to 
Christianity,  or,  perhaps,  that  others,  in 
wliom  Christianity  had  first  produced  a 
seriousness  of  character,  embraced  these 
habits  of  life,  as  a  token  of  the  change 
which  was  wrought  in  them.  Tlie  at- 
tention which  they  attracted  by  publicly 
appearing  in  tlie  philosopher's  cloak,t  the 
garb  of  the  philosophic  ascetics,  they 
might  make  use  of  in  order  to  enter  upon 
philosophical  and  religious  conversations 
with  those  whom  curiosity  or  veneration 
gathered  around  them  in  the  public  walks 
and  porticos,  and  to  represent  to  them 
Christianity  as  the  new  and  heavenly 
philosophy,^  which  had  come  to  them 
irom  the  East.  Justin  Martyr  is  assuredly 
painting  from  the  life,  when  he  relates§ 
that  when  he  appeared  on  a  public  walk 
early  in  the  morning,  a  multitude  came 
to  him  with  the  words,  "  Good  morrow, 
philosopher  !"||  and  one  of  them  said 
that  he  had  learned  from  his  master  in 
philosophy,  that  the  cloak  of  the  philo- 
sopher was  never  to  be  slighted,  but  that 
those  who  appeared  in  it  were  to  be  wel- 
comed in  a  friendly  manner,  and  their 
conversation  sought  after-,  which  then 
introduces  a  dialogue  concerning  the 
marks  of  true  religion  and  on  Christianity. 
'•'•  Rejoice,"  says  Tertullian  to  the  philo- 
sopher's mantle,  '•'  rejoice,  for  now  a  bet- 
ter philosophy  has  deigned  to  enclose  it- 
self within  thee,  since  thou  hast  begun  to 
be  the  garb  of  the  Christian." 

By  what  has  been  said,  it  will  be  judged 
natural,  that  from  the  opposition  to  worldly 
pleasures  which  Christianity  called  into 

purposely  from  the  beginning  embraced  this  course 
of  life. 

*  See,  for  instance,  Artemidor.  Oneirocrit.  iv., 
where  he  speaks  of  an  "Axs^ivefgif  i  c>/xs!rc<?cf,5/t.eA« 
Ji  cUjtu)   ovrt   aviet  itTKHTM   oi/Ti  yi.fjt.'.u   dim  KCtta'H'M 

(ilTi   TTKOVTOU    and  V.    1 8.,  {<fl/A:{7;9»7tV    EliTCVd'C  Jtati  TOU 

Kcyot;  nxt  rn  d(rx.>iTU  ^^uTi/uivot  dx.oKcuSv(, 
f  Tg//2»v,  T^ijiiivi'.v — pallium. 
i  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  Jud. 


CLEMENT    AGAINST    LEVITY. 


172 

action,  this  tendency  to  an  ascetic  life 
should  have  sprung  up.  We  cannot 
look  upon  asceticism,  abstractedly  con- 
sidered, as  any  thing  unchristian,  and 
condemn  it,  as  long  as  those  who  prac- 
tised it  considered  it  only  as  a  means 
towards  the  furtherance  of  holiness,  par- 
ticularly adapted  to  their  own  individual 
character,  or  as  a  means,  under  certain 
circumstances,  particularly  adapted  to  the 
furtherance  and  progress  of  the  kingdom 
of  God;  as  long  as  they  did  not  make 
the  means  the  end,  nor  forget  the  end  in 
the  means  ;  as  long  as  in  the  "  opus  op- 
eratum"  of  asceticism  no  merit  was 
claimed,  nor  the  outward  appearance  of 
holiness  deemed  sufficient,  while  the  real, 
essential,  and  inward  purification  of  the 
heart,  which  is  founded  on  love  and  on 
humility,  was  neglected  or  forgotten ;  in 
a  word,  as  long  as  men  attended  to  the  im- 
portant words  of  the  apostle,  who  utters 
the  following  warning :  "  And  though  I 
bestow  all  my  goods  to  feed  the  poor, 
and  though  1  give  my  body  to  be  burned, 
and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me  no- 
thing." But  as  soon  as  this  was  forgot- 
ten, the  transition  would  be  rapid  to  a 
state,  where  the  inward  charnel-house  of 
corruption  would  be  whited  over  with 
the  outward  appearance  of  holiness  ;  and 
under  a  Christian  semblance,  such  an  as- 
ceticism would  be  most  inimical  to  the 
real  interests  of  vital  Christianity.  Oh  ! 
that  all  ascetics  had  been  animated 
the  spirit  of  humility  and 
which  the  young  Alcibiades  showed 
among  the  confessors  imprisoned  at 
Lyons.*  He  had  been  accustomed,  as 
an  ascetic,  to  live  only  on  bread  and 
water,  and  he  continued  this  habit  also  in 
prison,  when  it  was  revealed  to  Attains, 
another  of  the  confessors,  by  the  voice  of 
the  Spirit  in  his  inward  heart,  that  Alci- 
biades was  doing  wrong,  not  to  enjoy 
what  God  bestows,  and  to  create  by  that 
means  a  jealousy  among  the  otiier  Chris- 
tians. So  Alcibiades  immediately  obeyed 
tills  exhortation,  and  without  raising  any 
scruples,  enjoyed  every  thing,  without 
distinction,  in  a  spirit  of  thankfulness 
towards  God."!" 

As  Christianity  did  not  produce  any 
momentary  or  magical  change  on  human 
nature,  but  imparted  to  it  a  Divine  prin- 
cijilc  of  life,  which,  with  man's  co-opera- 
tion, was  by  degrees  to  penetrate  and 
cnoble  his  wiiole  nature,  as  the  old  man 
constantly  dragged  himself  along  by  the 


by 


side  of  the  new,  it  was  to  be  expected, 
that  the  different  dispositions  of  the  old 
man,  which  at  first  opposed  themselves  in 
open  array  against  the  introduction  of 
Christianity,  again,  in  a  later  age,  having 
stolen  unperceived  into  the  Christian  life, 
should,  under  a  Christian  form,  oppose 
genuine  Christianity,  and  under  this  insi- 
dious form  they  would,  of  course,  be  far 
more  dangerous. 

This  was  also  the  case  in  regard  to  the 
particular  circumstance  of  which  we  have 
been  speaking.  The  two  opposite  and 
false  tendencies,  the  one  to  a  giddy  enjoy- 
ment of  worldly  things,  and  the  other  to 
a  proud  contempt  for  the  w^orld,  which 
Christianity  on  its  first  appearance  had  to 
combat,  introduced  themselves  into  Chris- 
tian life,  under  a  Christian  form,  not  only 
in  the  sects  which  opposed  the  universal 
Church,  (where  we  afterwards  find  them 
again,)  but  also  in  the  midst  of  the 
Church  herself. 

On  the  one  hand,  as  early  as  the  time 
of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  there  were 
those  among  the  Christians,  who  rejected 
the  exhortation  "  not  to  go,  like  the  hea- 
then, to  the  amusements  of  the  tlieatre, 
and  to  consider  deeply  what  is  becoming 
to  the  seriousness  of  the  Christian  cha- 
racter," with  the  following  excuse  :  '•'•  We 
cannot  be  all  philosophers  and  ascetics, 
we  are  imlearned  people,  we  cannot  read, 
we  understand  nothing  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
ture ;  how  can  people  lay  us  under  such 


self-<lenial  '  strict  and  rigorous  rules  .'"  Clement  an- 
swers these  lightminded  excuses  in  a 
truly  evangelical  spirit ;  such  a  distinction 
between  worldly  and  spiritual  persons 
could  not  be  allowed  among  Christians, 
who  were  all  bound,  as  such,  to  live  in 
the  same  self-denial,  all  alike  bound  to 
be  a  spiritual  people.  "  Are  we  not  all 
striving  after  eternal  life  ?  What  sayest 
thou  ?  What  signifies  then  thy  belief? 
How  canst  thou  love  God  and  thy  neigh- 
bour, without  being  a  philosopher  ?  (in 
that  practical  sense  in  which  ascetics  are 
called  philosophers.)  Although  thou  hast 
not  learned  to  read,  this  forms  no  excuse 
to  thee,  for  thou  canst  hear  tlie  word  of 
God.  Faith  is  the  possession,  not  of  those 
who  are  wise  according  to  this  world,  but 
of  those  who  are  wise  in  God  ;  faith  is 
learnt  without  letters;  the  writing  by 
which  it  is  engraven  on  the  heart,  is  a 
writing  for  the  unlearned  also,  and  it  is 
nevertheless  a  Divine  writing,and  is  called 
luvc  "*     And   where    he   intimates    how 


See  Page  66- 


f  Euseb.  V.  3. 


•    TlirTK  it  oil  a-c^aiv   rccv  Jt-iT*  K'.tr/ucv,  uAA*  raiY 


CONTRAST — EXTREME    ASCETICISM. 


'4'5 


Christianity  ought  to  leaven  all  the  inter- 
course of  life,  he  says  :  "  Also  the  affairs 
of  the  world  may  be  administered  by  a 
Christian,  with  God's  will,  after  an  un- 
worldly manner,  and  thus  those  who  are 
ia  trade,  publicans  and  the  like,  may  show 
a  spirit  of  philosophy."* 

On  the  other  hand,  a  moral  spirit  was 
also  formed  on  partial  views,  with  an  as- 
cetic tendency,  which  under  a  false  point 
of  view,  set  the  human  in  opposition  to 
the  Divine, — which  overlooked  and  mis- 
took the  character  of  Christianity  by 
which  it  is  destined  to  penetrate  and  en- 
noble ail  human  relations — which  sought 
a  merit  before  God  and  man  in  fasts  and 
abstinences — and  which,  ascribing  a  pe- 
culiar sanctity  to  the  ascetic  life  and  a  state 
of  celibacy,  promised  them  a  higher  de- 
gree of  future  happiness.^  From  this 
fancy,  joined  with  the  false  representa- 
tion of  a  peculiar  priesthood,  and  a  pe- 
culiar class  of  priests  in  the  Christian 
Church,  there  arose  by  degrees,  in  the 
course  of  llie  third  century,  the  error  that 
the  single  life  belongs  to  the  sanctity  of 
the  spiritual  condition.^  The  notion  of 
the  meritorious  efficacy  of  such  a  life,  the 
reverence  which  men  obtained  by  it,  and 
perhaps,  also  here  and  there  the  hope  of 
obtaining  a  comfortable  maintenance  from 
the  reverence  of  the  community  without 
personal  labour,§  now  moved  many  to 
enter  into  the  order  of  women  devoted 
only  to  the  Lord.  Thence,  therefore, 
among  these  every  kind  of  female  vanity 
arose  under  the  outward  appearance  of 
holiness,  and  was  fostered  by  general  de- 
ference and  honour,  which  is  of  all  things 
one  of  the  most  dangerous  to  mankind. 


Kxra.  Qi'.v  itrri  to  xtx^m."  jS  Si  k-ju  ovoj  •ygcLfxutruiv 
'utTrauSiviTiJ-  Jtai  ts  (Tiiyyert./j.y.a.  a.-jrui,  to  liueriK'A' 
afx-x  x^i  TO  Bucv  &.yct7rn  nixyjitau.  Psedagog.  lib.  iii. 
25.5. 

*  'AAXa  KM  TA  iv  KOTjuo)  Kcvfjuom;  Kara,  0kv  StTr-xyuv 
ob  KtnaKurai.  (there  is  here  a  play  on  the  double 
meaning  of  the  word  KOT/uci,  in  Greek,  which  can 
neither  be  translated  into  German  nor  English) 

KOJ  Ttfl/Tlt  (}>IX:.<7'C<pi'J]/'Ta!V  Ot  a}  C^U.l'.t  Kid  ol  KavirXot. 

f  Expressly  in  Origen,  Homil.  19  in  Jerem.  §  4, 
Comp.  Cyprian,  de  Habitu  Virginum. 

\  The  council  of  Elvira  (from  which,  however, 
we  cannot  argue  to  the  g(*neral  use  of  the  Church,) 
in  which  the  ascetic  spirit  prevailed  strongly,  or- 
dered, canon  33,  that  those  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons,  who  were  living  in  the  marriage  state, 
should  be  deprived  of  their  places. 

§  ^mulatio  illas,  non  religio  producit,  ali- 
quando  et  ipse  venter  Deus  eorum,  quia  facile  vir- 
gines  fratcrnitas  suscipit.  TertuUian,  de  Virgg. 
Veland.  c.  xiv.  It  must  be  confessed  that  Tertul- 
lian  is  here  .speaking  as  a  violent  and  exaggerated 
accuser  of  the  Catholic  Church. 


Cyprian  was,  therefore,  obligi  ^ 

a  letter  of  exhortation  and 
the  subject  of  the  variety  of 
the  love  of  pomp,  which  hi 
among  the  rich  damsels  of  Cai 
were  dedicated  to  God.*  It  L-,...cumes 
happened  that  these  people,  while  they 
despised  the  pure  institution  for  human 
nature,  to  which  God  leads  man  by  the 
voice  of  nature,  and- which  Christianity 
lias  .sanctified,  created  for  themselves  arti- 
ficial relations,  which  opposed  nature,  and 
therefore,  opposed  Christianity  also ;  re- 
lations in  which,  while  men  forgot  the 
weakness  of  the  flesh  and  trusted  too 
much  to  themselves,  the  corruptions  of 
sense  were  likely  to  appear  among  spi- 
ritual things  and  pervert  them  ;  I  allude  to 
these  young  women,  dwelling  and  living 
in  common  with  unmarried  spiritual  per- 
sons, under  the  pretence  of  a  connection 
of  a  purely  spiritual  nature.t 

When  once  Christian  perfection  was 
made  to  consist  in  such  a  withdrawal 
from  the  usual  habits  of  life,  this  incon- 
venience was  sure  to  follow,  that  the  re- 
quisites of  Christian  perfection  would  be 
lowered,  and  that  the  multitude  would  be 
at  liberty  to  avail  themselves  of  this,  as 
an  excuse  for  the  non-performance  of 
those  things  even,  which  Christianity  re- 
quires from  every  man  under  all  circum- 
stances,— an  excuse  which,  as  we  have 
observed  above,  Clement  of  Alexandria 
had  to  combat. 

From  the  very  first,  however,  voices  of 
no  mean  account  were  raised  against  this 
false  ascetic  inclination,  and  called  atten- 
tion to  the  essentials  of  Christian  feeling, 
by  which  alone  all  external  things  can  ac- 
quire their  true  character.  In  the  "Shep- 
herd of  Hennas,"  a  writing  much  esteem- 
ed in  the  first  centuries  of  Christianity, 
which  represents  the  practical  Christian 
life  under  an  allegorical  form,  it  is  said,J 
"  Above  all  things  exercise  your  absti- 


*  See  the  treatise  de  Habitu  Virginum. 

f  Those  who  were  afterwards  called  o-vvturaKTU, 
"  subintroductjE."  On  the  other  side,  see  Cy- 
prian, Ep.  Ixii.  ad  Pompon.  Although,  perhaps, 
Cyprian  elsewhere  speaks  in  too  exaggerated  lan- 
guage of  the  engagement,  connected  with  the  en- 
trance into  such  a  kind  of  life,  as  a  "  connubium 
spiritale  cum  Domino,"  he  explains  himself  here 
with  very  proper  moderation,  "Si  autem  perseve- 
rare  nolunt  vel  non  possunt,  melius  est,  ut  nubant, 
quam  in  igncm  dclictis  suis  cadant."  But  the 
council  of  Elvira  decreed,  canon  13,  that  virgins, 
who  had  thus  left  their  order,  and  would  not  re- 
turn to  it,  should  not  be  allowed  to  receive  the 
communion,  even  in  the  hour  of  death. 
1  ^  Lib.  iii.  Similitud.  v. 
p2 


CLEMENT    ON   ASCETICISM. 


17a 

gience  in  this,  in  abstaining  from  saying  or 
listening  to  evil  things,  and  purify  your 
heart  from  all  polhition,  from  all  revenge- 
ful feelings  and  covetousness,  and  on  the 
day  in  which  you  fast,  content  yourself 
witli  bread,  vegetables,  and  water,  and 
thank  God  for  these.  Reckon,  however, 
how  much  your  meal  would  have  cost  on 
this  day,  and  give  the  price  to  which  this 
comes  to  the  widow,  the  orphan,  or  the 
poor.  Happy  is  it  for  you,  if  you,  with 
all  yoiT  children,  and  with  your  whole 
household,  observe  these  things."  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria  appeals  to  the  fact, 
that  many  forms  of  heathen  worship  re- 
quired celibacy  and  abstinence  from  meal 
and  wine  in  their  priests,  and  that  among 
the  Indians  there  were  strict  ascetics,  the 
Samaneans,*  and  therefore,  he  concludes, 
that  what  is  found  also  in  other  religions, 
and  also  connected  with  superstition,  can- 
not be  in  itself  and  of  itself  peculiarly 
Christian-,  and  he  adds,  "Paul  declares 
that  the  kingdom  of  God  consists  not  in 
meals  and  drink,  nor  in  abstaining  from 
wine  and  meat,  but  in  righteousness, 
peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Spirit  As 
humility  is  shown,  not  by  the  chastise- 
ment of  the  body,  but  by  gentleness,  so 
also  is  temperance  a  virtue  of  the  soul, 
and  consists  not  in  external  but  in  inter- 
nal abstinence.  Temperance  does  not 
relate  merely  to  any  one  individual  thing, 
not  merely  to  pleasure  :  but  it  is  also  tem- 
perance to  despise  money,  to  tame  the 
tongue,  and  to  obtain  the  mastery  over 
evil  by  reason-t 

A  method  of  interpretation  of  Scripture 
which  does  not  penetrate  into  its  spirit, 
but  relies  on  passages  isolated  from  their 
context,  which  it,  therefore,  must  misun- 
derstand, would  necessarily  often  serve 
as  the  support  of  theoretical  and  practical 
errors  in  Christianity,  and  that  was  the 
case  here  also.  Passages,  where  Christ 
says  that  the  rich  enter  with  difliculty  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  where  he  requires 
of  the  rich  young  man,  in  order  to  attain 
perfection,  that  he  should  sell  all  his 
goods,  distribute  to  the  poor,  and  follow 
him — these  passages  were  so  misunder- 
stood, that  people  concluded  from  them 
that  the  bare  possession  of  earthly  wealth 
was  a  thing  incompatible  with  real  Chris- 
tianity, and  that  the  renunciation  of  the 
world  consisted   in  the   renunciation  of 


•  [These  are  probably  more  familiar  to  the 
English  reader  under  the  name  of  Buddhists.  See 
Encycl.  Britarin.  in  voc. — H.  J.  U.] 

■j-  Clemens,  Strom,  lib.  iii.  p.  446,  «Scc. 


external  things.  They  did  not  observe 
that  the  Redeemer,  who  saw  even  the 
hearts  of  men,  laid  this  trial  of  self-denial 
on  the  young  man  just  exactly  for  this 
very  reason,  that  he  was  most  enslaved 
in  this  one  point,  and  because  he  might 
best  be  taught  by  demanding  this  proof, 
how  far  short  he  still  was  from  the  moral 
perfection  and  fulfilment  of  the  law,  which 
he  had  flattered  himself  belonged  to  him. 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  in  his  beautiful 
essay,  entitled,  "  How  shall  the  rich  man 
act,  in  order  to  be  saved  ?"*  endeavoured 
to  oppose  this  error,  and  the  notions 
founded  upon  it,  by  showing  that  with 
our  Saviour  all  depends  upon  the  affec- 
tions. "  Our  Saviour,"  says  Clement, 
"  does  not  command  us,  as  many  super- 
ficially suppose,  to  cast  away  our  earthly 
property,  but  to  banish  from  our  souls 
the  thoughts  of  money,  and  desires  after 
it — that  sickness  of  the  soul,  the  cares, 
the    thorns    of    this    earthly  life,  which 

choke  the  seed  of  heavenly  life 

What  is  that  which  our  Lord  announces 
as  something  new,  as  the  only  source  of 
life  of  which  those  of  old  knew  nothing? 
What  is  this  which  is  peculiar  to  him? 
What  the  new  creation?  He  desires  not 
that  which  is  outward,  which  others  have 
also  done,  but  something  higher,  more 
divine,  and  more  perfect,  which  is  signi- 
fied by  this  outward  conduct;  namely, 
that  all  whlck  is  foreign  to  the  soul, 
must  he  torn  out  by  the  roots,  and  banished 

from  the  soul For  they  who  of 

old  despised  outward  things,  gave  away, 
indeed,  their  earthly  goods,  but  they  che- 
rished within  them  far  stronger  desires; 
for  they  were  filled  with  vanity,  pride,  and 
contempt  of  other  men,  as  if  they  had 
done  something  above  the  reach  of  simple 

humanity A  man  may  have  thrown 

away  his  earthly  goods,  and  yet  his  desire 
for  them  being  undiminished,  he  will  be 
doubly  disquieted  by  regret  for  his  pro- 
fusion, and  by  his  deprivation  of  the  ne- 
cessaries of  life How  could  one 

man  impart  of  his  goods  to  another  when 
all  had  nothing?  and  how  could  this  doc- 
trine of  our  Lord  escape  being  in  contra- 
diction with  many  other  of  his  glorious 

doctrines? Worldly  goods  are  only 

to  be  considered  as  so  much  materials  and 
instruments,  to  be  turned   to  good  pur- 
poses, by  those  who  know  how  to  put 
them  to  their  proper  use." 
When  the  Montanists  (see  below)  wished 


•   T«  0  a-oc^ofjiivi!  jrhQva-tn; 


DOMESTIC    LIFE    ENNOBLED. 


175 


to  impose  upon  the  Church  new  fasts  and 
laws  of  abstinence,  the  spirit  of  evangelical 
freedom  among  the  Christians  spoke  out 
fully  and  powerfully  against  them.  They 
were  accused  of  not  duly  distinguisljing 
between  the  economy  of  the  Old  and  of 
the  New  Testament,  of  making  laws  in 
matters  where  all  is  free  according  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  where  every  one 
must  act  freely,  according  to  his  own 
particular  feelings  and  necessities;  as  the 
only  abstinence  which  is  commanded  of 
God,  is  abstinence  from  evil  in  the  heart.* 
If  by  a  misconception  of  the  opposition 
to  the  world  which  Christianity  intro- 
duced, the  moral  life  received  an  ascetic 
direction,  this  was  again  counterbalanced 
by  the  essential  tendency  of  Christianity 
to  display  its  chief  glory  in  the  unpre- 
tending stillness  of  domestic  life,  to  enno- 
ble domestic  intercourse  by  a  Divine  life, 
and  to  form  the  family  into  a  temple  of 
God.  It  was  Christianity  which  first  pre- 
sented marriage  to  the  world  in  the  light 
of  an  union  of  deep  religious  and  spiritual 
import,  the  communion  which  belongs  to 
a  higher  state  of  life,  an  union  which 
reaches  beyond  this  transitory  world,  and 
unites  in  one  common  life  the  mutual 
and  consecrated  powers  of  two  beings  to 
the  glory  of  God.  The  marriage  state 
was,  therefore,  ennobled,  as  giving  scope 
to  so  many  peculiar  and  Christian  virtues, 
which,  under  other  circumstances,  could 
never  be  so  far  developed.  Clement  of 
Alexandria  says  against  those  who  prized 
celibacy  too  highly,  and  despised  mar- 
riage, "  The  genuine  Christian  has  the 
apostles  for  patterns,  and,  in  fact,  a  man 
does  not  distinguish  himself  by  choosing 
a  solitary  life,  but  he  obtains  a  victory 
over  other  men,  who  stands  fast  as  a  hus- 
band and  father,  amidst  all  the  trials  which 
befall  him  by  anxiety  for  wife  and  children, 
servants  and  fortune,  without  allowing 
himself  to  be  withdrawn  from  his  love  to 
God.  But  he  who  has  no  household  es- 
capes many  trials;  as  he  has  only  himself 
to  take  care  of,  he  is  below  that  man  who, 
more  disturbed  in  the  care  of  his  own  in- 
dividual salvation,  still  enters  more  into 
the  intercourse  of  life,  and  really  exhibits 
in  miniature  a  likeness  of  Providence 
itself."!  In  painting  the  Christian  mis- 
tress of  a  family,j  he  says,  "  The  mother 
is  the  theme  of  tlie  children's  praise,  the 
wife  is  the  theme  of  her  husband's  praise ; 


and  both  of  these  are  the  theme  of  the 
woman's  praise,  while  God  is  the  theme 
of  the  united  praise  of  all."  And  Terlul- 
lian  also:*  "  What  an  union  for  two  be- 
lievers, to  have  one  hope,  one  desire,  one 
course  of  life,  one  service  of  God,  in  com- 
mon the  one  wiih  the  other !  Both,  like 
brother  and  sister,  undivided  in  heart  and 
flesh,  or  rather  really  two  in  one  flesh, 
fall  down  together  on  their  knees,  they 
pray  and  fast  together,  they  teach,  they 
exhort,  they  bear  one  another  mutually, 
they  are  together  in  the  church  of  God, 
and  in  the  supper  of  the  Lord;  they  share 
with  one  anotiier  their  grievances,  their 
persecutions,  and  their  joys;  neither  hides 
any  thing  from  the  other,  neither  avoids 
the  other;  the  sick  are  visited  by  them 
with  pleasure,  and  die  needy  supported  ; 
psalms  and  hymns  resound  between  them, 
and  they  mutually  strive  who  shall  best 
praise  their  God.  Christ  is  delighted  to 
see  and  hear  things  like  these ;  He  sends 
his  peace  on  such  as  these;  where  two 
are,  there  is  He ;  and  where  He  is,  evil 
comes  not." 

It  was  anxiously  desired  that  the  Chris- 
tian mistresses  of  families,  by  the  serious- 
ness of  their  whole  demeanour,  by  their 
modest,  simple  clothing,  should  give  a 
token  of  their  inmost  sentiments,  and  that 
these  sentiments  should  shine  forth  in 
such  a  manner  more  eminently,  from  their 
appearance  in  an  age  when  extravagant 
pomp  and  luxury,  and  a  general  corrup- 
tion of  morals,  prevailed.  Here,  however, 
two  parties  stood  opposed  to  each  other ; 
the  one  making  humility  consist  in  poverty 
of  clothing,  worn  to  be  displayed,  and  car- 
rying the  notion  of  the  form  of  a  servant 
as  necessary  to  the  Christian  life  to  the 
utmost  extreme,  while  the  other  said,  "  It 
is  enough,  if  our  hearts  are  such  as  those 
of  Christian  women  ought  to  be;  God 
looks  to  the  sentiments,  and  regards  not 
the  outside.  Wherefore  should  we  out- 
wardly display  the  change  that  has  been 
inwardly  wrought  in  us.^  We  ought  far 
rather  to  give  the  heathen  no  occasion  to 
accuse  Christianity,  as  incompatible  with 
the  customs  of  the  world-t  We  possess 
these  worldly  goods ;  wherefore  should 
we  not  make  use  of  them  ?  Why  should 
we  not  enjoy  what  we  have.'  For  whom 
then  are  these  excellent  things  created,  if 
not  for  us.'  For  whom  are  costhj  things 
to   be,  if  all    prefer   that   which    is   not 


*  Tertullian,  de  Jrjuniis. 
■j-  Strom,  lib.  vii.  p.  741. 
%  Psedagog.  lib.  iii.  p.  250. 


*   Ad  Uxorem.  lib.  ii.  c.  8. 
\  Tertullian,  de  Cultu  FcEminarum,  especially- 
lib,  ii.  c.  xi. 


176 


CHRISTIAN   MARRIAGE. 


costly  V''  ♦Clement  of  Alexandria  answer- 
ed thus  to  the  latter  argument:  "  Even  if 
all  be  given  us,  if  all  be  allowed  us,  if  all 
be  permitted  to  us,  yet  all  may  not  be  be- 
coming, as  the  apostle  says;  God  has 
created  our  sex  for  bestowing  and  impart- 
ing, lie  has  created  every  thing  for  all, 
and  all  is  a  general  term,  and  the  richer 
must  make  no  exclusive  use  of  his  gifts. 
Those  words  are  also  neither  humane, 
nor  in  correspondence  with  our  social 
affections.  Love  would  rather  argue  thus : 
'  J  have  these  things,  why  should  I  not 
bestow  them  on  the  needy  V  "f  Tertul- 
lian  says,  "•  What  cause  can  you  have  to 
go  out  gaily  dressed,  for  you  are  far  from 
all  wliere  this  can  be  required  ?  For  you 
go  not  about  to  the  temples,  you  require 
no  plays,  and  know  nothing  of  the  festi- 
vals of  the  heathen!  You  have  no  other 
than  serious  matters  which  require  you 
to  appear  abroad.  A  sick  brother  is  to  be 
visited,  the  communion  celebrated,  or  a 
discourse  delivered;  and  if  the  calls  of 
friendship  require  your  attendance  on  the 
heathen,  why  should  you  not  appear  in 
your  own  peculiar  armour,  and  the  rather 
that,  going  to  unbelievers,  you  may  show 
them  the  difference  between  the  servants 
of  God  and  those  of  Satan,  that  you  may 
serve  for  an  example  to  them,  and  they 
may  be  instructed  by  you  ?" 

As  long  as  the  religious  and  moral 
point  of  view  in  which  Christianity  first 
presented  marriage  was  strictly  adhered 
to,  it  was  felt,  that  where  the  bond  of  re- 
ligion did  not  unite  the  consciences, 
■where,  on  the  contrary,  there  was  a  de- 
cided disunion  in  the  highest  circum- 
stance of  the  inward  life,  the  true  import 
of  marriage  could  never  receive  its  fulfil- 
ment. It  was,  therefore,  wished  that  no 
marriages  should  ever  take  place  between 
Christians  and  heathens.  Tertullian  en- 
deavours to  show  how  a  Christian  woman 
of  piety,  one  to  whom  Christianity  was 
the  soul  of  her  life,  Avho  belonged  to  the 
Church  as  a  living  member  of  it,  and  who 
felt  herself  happy  in  communion  with  it, 
must  be  distracted  and  limited  a  thou- 
sand fold  in  the  practice  of  her  religion 
by  living  with  a  heathen,  and  must  also 
be  injured  in  her  disposition.  He  says, 
"  When  an  assembly  for  prayer  is  to  be 


•   Clemens,  Pacdagog.  Jib.  ii.  c.  xi. 

■j-  Tertullian,  in  the  writing  we  have  quoted, 
and  Cyprian  (de  Hahitu  Virginum)  expresses 
similar  sentiments.  Tertullian  had  apparently 
seen  this  work  of  Clement,  and  Cyprian  probably 
read  both. 


held,  the  husband  will  destine  the  day  to 
the  use  of  the  bath ;  when  a  fast  is  to  be 
observed,  he  will  iuA^ite  company  to  a 
feast  There  will  never  be  more  impedi- 
ments from  household  business,  than  just 
exactly  when  the  duties  of  Christian 
charity  requires  the  wife  to  go  abroad. 
[The  passage  then  follows,  which  we 
quoted,  page  156,  expressing  the  duties 
of  a  Christian  wife,  in  which  she  would 
find  impediments  from  her  husband.] 
What  mutual  songs  coidd  one  lead  the 
other  to  sing }  She  will  hear  something 
of  the  theatre,  or  from  the  public  house; 
where  is  the  mention  of  God's  name  .'' 
where  is  Christ  called  upon .'  where  will 
be  the  strengthening  of  faith  by  the  quota- 
tion of  Scripture  in  conversation  ?*  where 
the  quickening  of  the  Spirit  ?  where  the 
Divine  blessing  ? 

The  case  was  different  where  Chris- 
tianity found  a  union  already  existing, 
which  it  could  only  sanctify,  and  not  dis- 
solve, from  that  where  a  Christian,  of 
either  sex,  voluntarily  engaged  in  a  con- 
nection, which  was  sure  lo  bring  with  it 
many  distractions  and  heartburnings  in 
the  inward  life,  and  many  trials ;  it  was 
one  thing  where  a  man  found  himself  in  a 
condition  full  of  trial  by  a  train  of  cir- 
cumstances coming  immediately  from 
God,  and  therefore,  walking  quietly  in  the 
path  prescribed  to  him  by  God,  might  ex- 
pect his  protection  in  these  trials,  and  his 
deliverance  from  them,  and  quite  another, 
when  a  man,  of  his  own  accord,  threw 
himself  into  temptations.  For  the  first, 
there  was  the  express  command  of  the 
Lord,  who  permitted  divorce  only  in  one 
case,  and  the  consideration  of  this  very 
matter  by  St.  Paul.  Tertullian  says, 
therefore,  "The  case  is  different  with 
those  who,  when  they  were  brought  to 
believe,  were  already  married  to  heathens  : 
since  such  a  marriage  is  valid  in  the  eyes 
of  God,  why  should  it  not  also  continue 
full  of  blessings,  so  that  it  should  continue 
to  be  spared  many  afflictions,  distractions, 
and  stains,  forasmuch  as  it  has  on  one 
side  the  protection  of  God's  grace  ?  It  is 
quite  a  different  thing  to  enter  into  for- 


*  "  Ubi  fomenta  fidei  dc  Scripturarum  interfec- 
iione  ?"  according  to  the  reading  of  Rigaltius  ;  ac 
cording  to  that  of  Pamclius,  it  is  "  interkctione'* 
"  the  mutual  reading"  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It 
is  difficult  to  decide  which  is  the  genuine  reading. 
As  in  the  whole  passage  he  is  speaking  of  quota- 
tion  during  conversation,  the  first  reading  is  very 
appropriate.  And  if  this  reading  be  genuine,  it 
follows  that  both  man  and  wife  ought  to 
familiar  acquaintance  with  the  Bible. 


CHRISTIAN   PRAYER. 


177 


bidden  connections,  voluntarily  and  un- 
called." "•  The  manner  in  which  his  wife 
was  converted  to  Christianity,"  says  Ter- 
tullian,  "  may  make  a  strong  impression 
on  the  heathen  husband  himself,  so  that 
he  would  refuse  to  disturb  her,  or  to 
watch  her  too  much.  He  has  perceived  a 
thing  of  much  importance ;  he  has  seen 
proofs  of  that  which  God  effects ;  he 
knows  that  she  is  become  better.  And 
thus,  those  will  be  more  easily  won,  to 
whom  the  grace  of  God  is  brought  home."* 
Jt  must  be  avowed,  that  the  observation 
of  this  change  did  not  always  make  so 
favourable  an  impression.  Many  a  hus- 
band, blindly  devoted  to  heathenism, 
when  he  observed  that  his  wife,  whose 
conduct  he  had  t'ormerly  been  obliged  to 
watch  most  jealously,  all  at  once  became 
so  fond  of  home  and  so  modest,  but  at 
the  same,  lime  found  that  this  change  was 
owing  to  Christianity,  he  divorced  her. 
whose  vices  he  had  before  endured.  It 
also  happened  frequently,  that  a  Christian 
woman,  who,  having  married  a  vicious 
husband,  had  formerly,  while  she  was  a 
heathen,  herself  ministered  to  his  vices, 
found  herself,  as  a  Christian,  bound  in 
conscience  to  discontinue  this  conduct. 
She  would  endeavour  at  first  to  lead  him 
to  a  better  way,  by  exhortation  and  per- 
suasion. But  when  he  rejected  this  with 
indignation,  she  would  feel  herself  obliged 
to  withdraw  from  participating  in  his  sin- 
ful habits  of  life,  and  to  divorce  herself 
from  him ;  and  this  became  the  source  of 
many  persecutions  raised  by  embittered 
Imsbands.j 

As  the  religious  view  of  marriage  so 
predominated,  it  was,  therefore,  ordained, 
in  early  times,  that  the  sanction  of  the 
Church  should  be  added  to  the  civil  cere- 
mony. The  pastor  of  the  Church  and 
the  deaconesses  were  called  together,  and 
it  was  declared  that  this  marriage  was  one 
contracted  after  God's  will,  and  not  from 
human  passions,  and  that  all  was  done  to 
the  honour  of  GodJ.  Bride  and  bride- 
groom received  the  communion  together ; 
they  offered  there  a  common  gift  to  the 
Church ;  and  hence,  again  in  the  prayer 
of  the  Church  connected  with  the  com- 
munion, a  blessing  was  particularly  asked 
for  the  newly  concluded  marriage.  How 
highly  this  consecration,  on  the  part  of 
the   Church,    was    esteemed    by    Chris- 


*   [This  extract  is  from  Tertull.  ad  Uxor.  ii.  8. 
— H.  J.  R.J 

j-  V.  Justin  M.  Apolog  ii. 

i  Ignatii  Ep.  ii.  ad  Poly  carp.  §  5. 

23 


tians,  we  may  judge  from  the  following 
passage  of  Tertnllian  :  "  IJow  shall  we  be 
able  to  declare  the  happiness  of  that  mar- 
riage, which  is  concluded  by  the  Church, 
sealed  by  the  communion,  and  consecrated 
by  the  blessings  of  the  Church,  which 
angels  announce,  and  which  our  heavenly 
Father  recognises  as  valid."* 

Prayer  was  considered  the  soul  of  the 
whole  Christian  life.  Men  united  in  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  this,  who, from  the  differ- 
ence in  their  dispositions  and  their  habits 
of  thought,  were  widely  at  variance  on 
many  important  matters.  Where  the  spirit 
of  Christianity  brings  together  two  oppo- 
site natures,  even  the  strongest  differences 
hardly  make  their  appearance ;  as,  for  in- 
stance, in  the  contrast  between  the  prac- 
tical realism  of  Tertullian,  whose  habits 
of  thought  led  him  to  corporealise  every 
thing,  and  the  speculative  turn  of  Origen, 
v/ho  was  inclined  to  run  into  the  oppo- 
site extreme,  and  spiritualise  every  thing. 
Both  of  these  show  themselves  alike 
penetrated  with  vjtal  Christianity,  when 
they  speak  of  prayer ;  both  speak  from 
their  own  internal  experience  and  in  both 
the  true  spirit  of  vital  Christianity  here 
breaks  forth.  In  accordance  with  the 
usual  mode  of  conception  in  the  earlier 
days  of  Christianity,  Tertullian  considers 
prayer  as  the  exercise  of  the  Christian 
priesthood.  "  This  is  the  spiritual  sacri- 
fice," he  says,t  ''•which  has  superseded 
the  sacrifice  of  the  old  covenant."  (Isa.  i. 
11.)  "This  passage  shows  us  what  God 
does  not  require ;  what  He  does  require, 
the  Gospel  teaches  us.  '  The  time  cometh 
when  the  true  worshippers  shall  worship 
God  in  Spirit  and  in  truth ;  for  God  is  a 
Spirit.'  We  are  the  true  worshippers 
and  the  true  priests,  we  who  pray  to  Him 
in  spirit,  and  offer  up  to  Him  the  sacrifices 
suited  to  his  Divine  Being,  and  well 
pleasing  to  Him — that  which  He  requires. 
What  can  the  God,  who  desires  this 
prayer,  have  refused  to  the  prayer  that 
comes  from  the  Spirit  and  from  tlie 
Truth  ?  How  much  do  we  read,  hear, 
and  believe,  of  the  proofs  of  its  effi- 
cacy !"  He  pictures  then  the  peculiar  ef- 
ficacy of  Christian  prayer — how  it  ought 
to  correspond  to  tlie  form  of  religion  de- 
livered in  the  New  Testament,  and  how 


*  Ad  Uxor.  ii.  8. 

•j-  C.  xxviii.  de  Orat.  in  the  pieces  first  pub- 
lished by  Muratori,  vol.  iii.  Anecdotorum  Bibl. 
Ambros. 

[Bishop  Kaye  (Tertullian,  p.  406,)  states  it  as 
his  opinion  that  these  additional  chapters  to  the 
treatise  de  Oratione  are  not  genuine. — H.  J.  R.] 


178  EFFICACY    OF    A    LIFE    OF    PRAYER. 

Christian  prayer  displays  its  real  power,  [  something  which  has  a  foundation  in  the 
not  in  savirif'  men  by  miracles  in  the  sea-  internal  life,  considered  as  a  whole  pro- 
son  of  death  and  sufferings,  but  in  making  I  ceeding  from  one  centre.  The  spirit  of 
them  capable  of  bearing  death  and  suf-  \  tliankfulness  to  a  heavenly,  redeeming 
■"■  '      '       ''  'Father — tlie   spirit  of  childlike  devotion 

to  him — the  feeling  in  regard  to  Him,  of 


ferings  with  tranquillity  and  cheerful 
resignation.  "  By  the  power  of  the  grace 
imparted,  it  abates  not  the  pain  of  the 
sulfering  but  it  arms  the  suflerer,  and  him 
that  feefs  the  pain,  with  power  to  bear  it. 
The  prayer  of  the  Christian  brings  not 
down  retaliation  from  heaven,  but  it 
averts  the  anger  of  God;  it  watches  for 
its  enemies,  it  prays  for  its  persecutors, 
it  obtains  forgiveness  of  sins,  it  frightens 
away  temptations,  it  comforts  the  faint- 
hearted, it  quickens  tlie  courageous : 
prayer  is  the  wall  of  faithy  Origen 
says,*  "  How  much  has  each  one  of  us 
to  relate  of  the  efficacy  of  prayer,  if  he  is 
inclined  to  remember  with  thankfulness 
the  benefits  of  God.  Souls,  which  had 
long  been  unfruitful,  and  who  were  well 
aware  how  dry  they  were,  when  fructified 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  from  the  force  of  con- 


the  needfulness  of  his  assistance,  and  the 
consciousness  of  being  nothing,  and  of 
being  able  to  do  nothing  without  him — 
was  to  animate  the  whole  Christian  life. 
This  life  was,  therefore,  to  be  a  continued 
thanksgiving  for  the  grace  of  redemption, 
a  prayer  of  constant  longing  after  an  in- 
crease of  holiness  by  communion  with  the 
Redeemer.  This  was  t/ie  view  of  prayer 
which  the  New  Testament  was  destined 
to  substitute  in  the  place  of  that  which 
had  previously  prevailed ;  a  view,  which 
looked  on  prayer  as  an  individual  act, 
dependent  on  certain  times  and  hours, 
and  consisting  in  individual  effusions  or 
particular  forms.  And  thus  the  fathers  of 
this  age  expressed  themselves.  Origen 
ys,*  '^  He  prays  without  ceasing,  who 


stant  prayer,  produceii  words   of  salva-    unites    prayer  and    action  together  prO' 


tion,  full  of  the  conceptions  of  truth. 
What  hostile  powers  that  threatened  to 
annihilate  our  holy  faith,  have  been  often 
brought  to  shame!  We  trust  to  that 
•whicli  says,  '  Some  put  their  trust  in 
chariots  and  horses,  but  we  will  think 
on  the  name  of  the  Lord  our  God,' 
(Psalm  XX.  8,)  and  we  found  that  '  a 
horse  is  but  a  vain  thing  to  save  a  man.' 
He  that  confides  in  prayer  has  often  van- 
quished even  tlie  power  of  plausible  rea- 
sons, which  were  sufficient  to  terrify  those 
■who  were  accounted  believers.  How  often 
do  those,  who  have  fallen  into  tempta- 
tions, hard  to  be  overcome,  suffer  no 
shame  from  tliein,  and  come  forth  from 
them  unhurt,  without  even  being  touched 
by  the  smell  of  the  fire  that  was  kindled 
against  them  !  And  what  further  shall  I 
add  .''  How  often  has  it  happened  tliat 
those  who  have  been  delivered  up  to  wild 
beasts  enraged  against  us,  to  evil  spirits 
and  cruel  men,  have  brought  these  beings 
to  silence,  so  that  their  teeth  could  not 
touch  us,  who  are  the  members  of  Christ  I 
We  know  that  many  who  had  fallen  from 
the  commands  of  God,  and  lay  already  in 
the  pit  of  death,  have  been  saved  by  the 
prayer  of  repentance."  But  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  Christian  life  supposes,  that 
nothing  in  it  can  exist  insulated  from  the 
other  parts  of  it;  all  that  comes  particu- 
larly forward  at  any  one  moment,  is  yet 


perly,  since  works  also  are  a  part  of 
prayer;  for  the  apostle's  words,  'Pray 
without  ceasing,'  are  to  be  considered  as 
something  which  may  be  achieved,  if  we 
consider  the  whole  life  of  the  believer  as 
one  continued  prayer  ■,'\  of  which  prayer, 
usually  so  called  forms  only  a  part.  And 
the  same  Origen  says,  in  regard  to  the 
Lord's  Prayer,;{; ''  We  cannot  believe  that 
words  have  been  taught  us,  only  to  be 
recited  at  a  certain  hour  of  prayer.  11 
we  understand  properly  that  which  is  said 
in  regard  to  '  praying  without  ceasing,' 
our  whole  life — if  we  are  inclined  thus 
to  pray  without  ceasing — must  say,  'Our 
Father,  which  art  in  heaven,'  since  such  a 
life  has  its  conversation,  not  on  earth,  but 
by  all  means  in  heaven,  since  we§  are  the 
throne  of  God,  because  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  has  its  habitation  in  all  tiiose 
who  bear  the  form  of  the  heavenly  man, 
and  by  that  means  become  heavenly." 
Clement  of  Alexandria  says,l|  "Prayer, 
if  I  may  speak  so  boldly,  is  intercourse 
with  God.  If  we  only  lisp,  if  we  even 
silently  speak  to  God,  the  lips  not  mov- 


•  De  Orat. 

1728.] 


13.  [§  35   ed.  Reading.  Lond. 


*  De  Orat.  §  12  [§  31.  ed.  Reading.] 

"j"   £i    TTxvrx  Tcv  yStiV  Tcv  ayuv  (jliai  a-jvaTrro/AWiiv 

i  Be  Orat.  c.  xxii.  [§  .57.  ed.  Reading.] 
§  In  Reading's  edition  the  passage  runs  thus  : 
'Ry  cuDuvQK,  Sgovcic  rvy^nfova-i  t'm  &(:u,    "in  heaven 
which  in- the  throne  of  God."    I  have  translated, 
from  ihe  German. — H.  J.  R.] 
II  Stromat.  Lib.  vii.  p.  722. 


SEASONS    OF    PRAYER. 


179 


ing ;  yet  we  cry  to  Him  in  our  hearts,  for 
God  listens  always  to  the  inward  direc- 
tion of  the  heart  to  him."*  The  same 
person,  when  he  wishes  to  represent  an 
ideal  picture  of  a  Christian  in  heart, 
ripened  in  faith  and  profession,  says  of 
him,t  "■  In  every  place  will  he  pray, 
though  not  openly,  to  be  seen  of  men. 
Even  when  lie  is  walking  for  pleasure, 
even  when  he  is  in  converse  with  other 
men,  in  stillness,  in  reading,  and  when  he 
is  engaged  in  reasonable  business,  he 
prays  by  all  means.  And  even  also  if  he 
only  think  on  God  in  the  chamber  of  the 
souU  and  with  silent  sighings  calls  upon 
his  Father;  He  jcill  be  near  him  and  with 
him,  for  he  is  still  speaking  to  hini."J 

But  althougli  prayer  be  a  direction  of 
the  heart  whicli  goes  through  the  whole 
9f  the  Christian  life,  yet  it  must,  neverthe- 
less, become  more  prominent  in  special 
effusions  of  the  hearty  and  in  compliance 
with  the  wants  of  man,  as  a  creature  of 
sense,  it  must  make  itself  heard  also  in 
words  ;  and  these  particular  seasons  must 
form  a  kind  of  consecration  for  all  the 
rest  of  the  life.  The  Christians  were  ac- 
customed to  select  those  hours  for  prayer, 
which  had  been  usually  so  employed  by 
the  Jews — the  third,  the  sixth,  and  the 
ninth,  according  to  the  then  division  of 
the  day — that  is,  nine  in  the  morning, 
twelve,  and  three  in  the  afternoon — not 
as  if  prayer  were  dependent  on  any  cer- 
tain times  ;  but  as  Tertullian§  declared, 
"  in  order  that  those  who  were  likely  to 
be  withdrawn  from  the  duty  of  prayer  by 
earthly  business,  might  be  reminded  of 
it."  The  Christians  were,  besides,  accus- 
tomed to  sanctify  by  prayer  all  the  more 
important  seasons  of  the  day,  and  all 
transactions  of  any  importance,  in  regard 
either  to  spiritual  or  temporal  life  ;  for 
even  all  that  is  earthly  was  to  be  rendered 
holy  by  being  referred  to  that  which  is 
heavenly.  "  It  becomes  the  believer," 
says  TertuUian,  *•'  to  take  no  food,  to 
enter  no  bath,  without  the  intervention  of 
prayer ;  for  the  strengthening  and  refresh- 
ing of  the  soul  ought  to  precede  the 
strengthening  and  refreshing  of  the  body  ; 
the  heavenly  ought  to  precede  the  earth- 
ly." Thus  also  the  Christian,  who  had 
received  into  his  house  a  brother  from  a 
distant  land,  and  refreshed  him  wit!)  all 
that  lay  in  his  power,  was  bound  not  to 


dismiss  him  without  prayer ;  he  was  to 
feel  as  if  he  had,  in  this  stranger-brother, 
seen  the  Lord  himself  in  his  house ;  and 
by  the  guest,  the  earthly  refreshment 
which  he  had  received,  was  not  to  be 
thought  of  more  value  than  the  heavenlv. 
which  was  offered  to  him  at  his  depar- 
"^    '  r  any  pressing  emergencies. 


Undei 


which  affected  the  community  in  general, 
or  those  in  whom  they  took  particular 
interest,  they  all  assembled  for  tlie  pur- 
pose of  prayer,  and  all  general  delibera- 
tions were  opened  with  prayer.  It  was 
in  prayer  that  the  brotherly  communion 
and  the  mutual  sympathy  of  the  members 
of  the  one  body  were  to  be  shown  ;  everv 
one  was  to  pray  in  the  spirit  of  all,  and 
commend  the  circumstances  of  all  the 
I  brethren,  which  he  looked  upon  as  his 
I  own,  to  the  Head  of  the  Church,  and 
through  Him  to  eternal  love.  Thus  Cy- 
prian says  in  the  explanation  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer  :  '"The  teacher  of  peace  and  com- 
munion did  not  wish  that  each  individual 
should  pray  for  himself,  but  that  every 
one  should  pray  for  all.  We  do  not  sav 
'  my  Father,'  but '  our  Father,'  and  every 
one  prays  not  for  the  forgiveness  of  his 
oicn  si7is  alone,  nor  for  himself  alone, 
'  that  he  may  not  be  led  into  temptation, 
and  may  be  delivered  from  evil.'  Ours 
is  a  common  prayer,  and  when  we  prav, 
we  pray  not  only  for  individuals,  but  for 
the  whole  Church  ;  because  we,  as  mem- 
bers of  the  Church,  are  all  one.  God, 
the  author  of  peace  and  concord,  wished 
that  thus  every  one  should  pray  for  all,  as 
He  has  included  all  in  one."  And  when 
bishop  Cyprian,  under  the  pressure  of 
persecution,  was  encouraging  his  Church 
to  prayer,  he  wrote  thus  :J  "  Let  every 
one  pray  to  God,  not  for  himself  alone, 
but  for  all  hrethren,  as  the  Lord  has 
taught  us  to  pray." 


Kwrran  iTruta. 

t  fctromat.  lib.  vii.  p.  728. 

i  'O  Ji  iyyj; x.*t'tTi  \!O,cuv^0f  Trx^ffty. 

§  Lib.  cit.  c.  XXV. 


*  I  shall  here  subjoin  a  translation  of  the  whole 
passage,  (TertuUian,  de  Orat.  c.  xxvi.,)  which  is 
not  wholly  without  its  difficulties.  "But  ho  him- 
self (the  brother  who  is  come  from  foreign  lands,) 
after  he  has  been  received*  by  the  brethren,  must 
not  prize  the  earthly  refreshment  he  has  received 
higher  than  the  heavenly ;  for  immediately  his 
faith  will  be  condemned,"  (that  is,  he  will  prove 
his  unbelief,  if  he  esteems  the  parting  prayer,  the 
blessing  of  his  Christian  brother,  his  host,  as 
nothing,  compared  with  the  bodily  refreshment  af- 
forded to  him.)  "  or,  how  canst  thou,  after  the 
command  of  the  Lord,  say,  '  Peace  be  to  this 
house,'  unless  thou  returncst,  to  those  who  dwell 
in  the  house,  the  wish  of  blessing,  which  they 
have  first  bestowed  on  thee  V 

f  Ep.  vii. 

*  I  think,  in  this  passage,  we  must  read  "ex- 
ceptus"  insteadof  "  exemplis." 


180 


SPIRITUAL    WORSHIP. 


As  it  was  acknowledged  and  believed 
that  Divine  things  could  only  be  under- 
stood under  the  light  of  the  Divine  Spirit, 
and  that  by  prayer  the  heavenly  fountain 
was  opened  to  man,  prayer  Avas  consid- 
ered as  the  necessary  means  to  a  knowl- 
edge of  Divine  things,  and  a  right  under- 
standing of  Scripture.  When  Origen,  that 
great  father  of  the  Church,  who  had 
called  together  all  those  human  means 
for  the  understanding  of  Scripture,  and  the 
development  of  its  doctrines,  which  could 
only  be  had  in  his  time,  as  well  as  di- 
rected all  his  learned  and  speculative 
study  to  the  same  purpose,  was  exhort- 
ing his  disciple,  the  young  Gregory  (after- 
wards called  Thaumaturgus,)  to  diligent 
''  knocking  and  seeking"  in  the  study  of 
Scripture,  he  added,  "  but  let  it  not  be 
enough  for  you  to  knock  and  to  seek  ; — 
to  a  knowledge  of  Divine  things,  the 
most  necessary  means  is  prayer.*  To 
incite  us  to  this,  our  Saviour  did  not  say 
merely,  '  knock  and  it  shall  be  opened  to 
you,  seek  and  ye  shall  find,'  but  also, 
'  pray  and  it  shall  be  given  to  you.'  " 

It  was  usual  on  those  days  which  were 
especially  dedicated  to  the  memory  of  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  to  pray  standing 
upright,  in  remembrance  that  Christ  had 
raised  up  to  heaven  man  who  was  fallen 
and  sunk  in  worldly  defilements  ;  but  on 
other  days  they  prayed  kneeling.  But 
Origen,  nevertlieless,  cautions  men  against 
the  notions  which  made  them  forget  in- 
ward things  in  outward  forms  ;  he  turned 
them  from  the  latter  to  the  former,  and 
endeavoured  to  show,  that  outward  things 
have  no  importance  except  in  reference  to 
inward,  and  of  themselves  and  in  them- 
selves are  matters  of  indifference.  "  Be- 
fore a  man,"  he  says,|  '•'•  stretches  out  his 
hands  to  heaven,  he  must  raise  his  soul 
thither  ;  before  a  man  raises  up  his  eyes, 
he  must  raise  his  spirit  up  to  God;  for 
we  cannot  doubt,  that  out  of  a  thousand 
possible  attitudes  of  the  body,  those  with 
outspreading  of  the  hands  and  uplifting 
of  the  eyes  must  be  preferred  to  all  others, 
as  giving  some  representation  of  the  dis- 
positions proper  to  prayer.  We  think 
that  this  must  be  preferred,  where  no  pe- 
culiar circumstances  exist  •,  for  under  cer- 
tain circumstances,  in  cases  of  illness, 
people  may  pray  sitting  or  lying.  And 
under  certain  circumstances,  as  for  in- 
stance, when  men  are  on  shipboard,  or 
where  the  present  state  of  the  case  will 


•  Liayn^r^Tit/Tyi  ya^  km  i  Tn^t  rou  nuv  tx  6««  tix" 
f  Chap.  xxxi. 


not  admit  of  their  offering  up  the  prope. 
prayers,  they  may  then  pray,  without  ap- 
pearing to  do  so.  And  because  kneeling 
is  required  when  a  man  confesses  his 
own  sins  to  God,  and  prays  for  forgive- 
ness of  them,  every  one  must  perceive 
that  this  position  is  a  token  of  a  bowed 
down  and  humble  spirit."  Origen,  Ter- 
tullian,  and  Cyprian,  accordingly  explain, 
Philipp.  ii.  10,  of  such  a  spiritual  bowing 
of  the  knee  and  self-humiliation,  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  saying  that  it  does  not 
relate  to  the  vain  show  of  outward  ges- 
tures, but  to  the  disposition  of  the  heart 
towards  God.  "  God  hears  not  the  voice, 
but  the  heart,"  says  Cyprian ;  "  lie  sees 
the  thoughts  of  men,  and  requires  not  to 
be  reminded  by  their  cry;  as  Hannah,  in  the 
Book  of  Kings,  represents  to  us  the  form 
of  the  Church,  which  prays  to  God,  not 
with  the  outcry  of  prayer,  but  in  the  still 
depths  of  the  heart.  She  spoke  in  silent 
prayer,  but  her  faith  was  known  to  God." 

That  which  we  have  above  extracted 
from  TertuUian's  picture  of  the  blessed- 
ness of  a  Christian  marriage,  shows  that 
spiritual  songs  in  common,  and  a  common 
reading  of  the  Scriptures,  formed  part  of 
the  daily  edification  of  a  Christian  family. 
Thus  Clement  of  Alexandria  also  recom- 
mends united  prayers  and  reading  of  the 
Bible  together,*  as  proper  morning  occu- 
pations for  a  Christian  couple.  The  con- 
troversial writings  of  TertuUian  on  matters 
of  ecclesiastical  life  and  of  morality, 
where  he  considers  himself  as  opposing 
laymen,  show  that  these  latter  were  also 
well  acquainted  with  the  Scriptures,  and 
were  accustomed  to  judge  things  that  re- 
lated to  life  out  of  them. 

From  the  general  consideration  of  the 
Christian  life,  and  of  family  devotion,  we 
now  pass  to  that  of  the  public  worship  of 
the  early  Christians. 

(2.)   On  the  Fuhlic  Worship  of  God. 

(a.)  JVatiire  of  Christian  loorship  in  general. 

Since  the  religion  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment did  not  admit  of  any  peculiar,  out- 
ward priesthood,  similar  to  that  of  the 
Old,  the  same  outward  kind  of  worship, 
dependent  on  certain  places,  times,  and 
outward  actions  and  demeanours,  would 
also  have  no  place  in  its  composition. 
The  kingdom  of  God,  the  temple  of  the 
Lord,  were  to  be  present,  not  in  this 
or  that  place,  but  in  every  place,  where 
Christ  himself  is  active  in  the  Spirit,  and 
where    through    Him    the   worship    of 


Eu;in  Kxi  iyxyvotTK,  Ptedag.  lib.  ii.  p.  194,  D. 


VALUE    OP    CHRISTIAN    COMMUNION'. 


181 


God  in  spirit  and  in  truth  is  established. 
Every  Christian  in  particular,  and  every 
Church  in  general,  was  to  represent  a 
spiritual  temple  of  the  Lord  ;  the  true  wor- 
ship of  God  was  to  be  only  in  the  inward 
heart ;  and  the  whole  life,  proceeding  from 
such  inward  dispositions,  sanctified  by 
faith,  was  to  be  a  continued  spiritual  ser- 
vice :  this  is  the  great  fundamental  idea  of 
the  Gospel,  which  prevails  throughout  the 
New  Testament,  by  which  the  whole  out- 
ward appearance  of  religion  was  to  assume 
a  different  form,  and  all  that  once  was  car- 
nal, was  to  be  converted  into  spiritual,  and 
ennobled.  This  notion  came  forward 
most  strongly  in  the  original  inward  life 
of  the  first  Christians,  particularly  when 
contrasted  with  Judaism,  and  still  more 
so  when  contrasted  with  heathenism; — 
a  contrast,  which  taught  the  Christians  to 
avoid  all  pomp  that  caught  the  eye,  and  all 
multiplication  of  means  of  devotion,  ad- 
dressed to  the  senses,  while  it  made  them 
hold  fast  the  simple,  spiritual  character  of 
the  Christian  worship  of  God.  It  was  this 
which  always  struck  the  heathen  so  much 
in  the  Christian  worship ;  namely,  that 
nothing  was  found  among  them  of  the 
outward  pomp  of  all  other  religions  :  "  no 
temples,  no  altars,  no  images."  This  re- 
proach was  made  to  the  Christians  by 
Celsus,  and  answered  thus  by  Origen : 
**  In  the  highest  sense  the  temple  and  the 
image  of  God  are  in  the  human  nature  of 
Christ  •,  and  hence,  also,  in  all  the  faithful, 
Avho  are  animated  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ — 
living  images!  with  which  no  statue  of 
Jove  by  Phidias  is  fit  to  be  compared."* 
Christianity  impelled  men  frequently  to 
seek  for  the  stillness  of  the  inward  sanc- 
tuary, and  here  to  pour  forth  their  heaft 
to  God,  who  dwells  in  such  temples ;  but 
then  the  flames  of  love  were  also  lighted 
in  their  hearts,  which  sought  communion, 
in  order  to  strengthen  each  other  mutually, 
and  to  unite  themselves  into  one  holy 
flame,  which  pointed  towards  heaven. 
The  communion  of  prayer  and  devotion 
was  thought  a  source  of  sanctification,  in- 
asmuch as  men  knew  that  the  Lord  was 
present  by  his  Spirit  among  those  who 
were  gathered  together  in  his  name ;  but 
then  they  were  far  from  ascribing  any 
peculiar  sacredness  and  sanctity  to  the 
place  of  assembly.  Such  an  idea  would 
appear  to  partake  of  heathenism  ;  and  men 
Avere  at  first  in  less  danger  of  being  seduced 
into  such  an  idea,  because  the  first  general 


places  of  assembly  of  the  Christians  were 
only  common  rooms  in  private  houses, 
just  according  as  it  happened  that  any 
member  of  the  Church  had  sufficient  ac- 
commodation for  the  purpose.  Thus  Gains 
of  Corinth,  (Rom.  xvi.,)  is  called  the  host 
of  the  Church,  because  the  Church  was  in 
the  habit  of  assembling  in  a  room  of  his 
house.  Origen  says  :*  "  The  place,  where 
believers  come  together  to  pray,  has  some- 
thing agreeable  and  useful  about  it ;"  but 
then  he  only  says  this  in  respect  to  that 
spiritual  communion.  "  Christ,"  he  thinks, 
"  with  the  host  of  angels,  dwells  in  the 
assembly  of  the  saints  ;  therefore,  we  may 
not  despise  prayer  in  such  assemblies,  for 
they  have  a  peculiar  power  for  those  who 
take  part  in  them  with  an  upright  heart." 
"  Not  the  place,  but  the  congregation  of 
the  elect,  I  call  the  Church,"  says  Clement 
of  Alexandria-!  TertuUian  says.J  "We 
may  pray  in  every  place  to  which  accident 
or  necessity  brings  us  •,  for  the  apostles, 
who  prayed  to  God  and  sang  to  his  praise 
in  prison  before  thi  ears  of  the  jailor,  no 
more  contravened  the  commands  of  the 
Lord  than  Paul,  who  celebrated  the  Lord's 
Supper  in  the  ship  before  the  eyes  of  all :" 
(Acts  xxvii.)  This  was  a  remarkable 
proof  of  a  free  and  evangelical  spirit, 
although  the  application  of  the  latter  pas- 
sage is  erroneous. 

Man,  we  must  avow,  is  very  easily  led 
to  fall  away  from  the  worship  of  God  in 
spirit  and  in  truth,  and  to  connect  the  re- 
ligion of  the  Spirit  with  outward  and 
earthly  things  ;  as  the  apostle  says, "  hav- 
ing begun  in  the  spirit,  to  wish  to  end  in 
the  flesh."  Watchfulness  on  this  point 
was  constantly  needed,  lest  the  Jewish  or 
the  heathen  notions  should  here  intrude 
themselves  on  those  of  the  Gospel,  which 
was  likely  enough  to  happen  as  soon  as 
the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment notions  of  the  priesthood  had  been 
confused.  Even  in  the  time  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria  he  found  himself  obliged  to 
combat  the  notion,  which  allowed  the  es- 
sentials of  the  Christian  life  to  be  of  one 
kind  in,  and  of  another  out  of,  the  Church. 
"The  disciples  of  Christ,"  he  says,  § 
"  ought  to  form  the  whole  course  of  their 


*  C.  Celsum,  viii.  p.  400.     [The  passage,  from 
which  I  suppose  this  is  taken,  though  not  literally 
'translated,  is  p.  389,  ed.  Spencer.— H.  J.  R.] 


*  De  Orat  c.  xxxi.  [C.  Ixvi.  ed.  Reading. 
This  extract  is  selected  from  different  parts  of  the 
chapter.  Origen  supposes  the  disembodied  spirits 
of  the  saints,  &c.,  to  be  present  in  these  assemblies. 
H.  J.R.] 

f  O'j  yxp  TO  rovov,  oXA*  to  oSm/^^*  Toir  iKKuntev 
iKKKna-tctv  x-tAa.     Stromat.  vii.  715,  B. 

if  De  Orat.  c.  xxiv. 

i  Paedagog.  Ui.  p.  256. 

Q 


182 


PLACES    OF    ASSEMBLY. 


life  and  conduct  on  the  model  which  they 
assume  in  the  churches,  for  the  sake  of 
propriety;  they  ought  to  be  such,  and  not 
merely  to  seem  so,  as  mild,  as  pious,  and  as 
charitable :  but  now,  I  know  not  how  it  is, 
thev  change  their  habits  and  their  manners 
with  the  change  of  place,  as  the  polypus, 
they  say,  changes  its  colour,  and  becomes 
like  the  rock  on  which  it  hangs.  They  lay 
aside  the  spiritual  habit  which  they  had 
assumed  in  the  Church,  as  soon  as  they 
have  left  the  Church,  and  assimilate  them- 
selves to  the  multitude,  among  whom  they 
live.  I  should  rather  say,  that  they  con- 
vict themselves  of  hypocrisy,  and  show 
what  they  really  are  in  their  inward  na- 
ture, by  laying  aside  the  mask  of  piety 
which  they  had  assumed  ;  and  while  they 
honour  the  word  of  God,  they  leave  it 
behind  them  in  the  place  where  they 
heard  it." 

(b.)   The  Christian  Places  of  Assembly. 

We  observed  abov^,  that  the  Christian 
places  of  Assembly  were,  at  first,  in  the 
rooms  of  private  houses  ;  it  may,  perhaps, 
be  the  case,  that  in  large  towns,  where 
the  number  of  Christians  was  soon  con- 
siderable, and  no  member  of  the  Church 
had  any  room  in  his  house  sufficient  to 
contain  all  his  brethren,  or  in  places 
where  men  did  not  fear  any  prejudicial 
consequences  from  large  assemblies,  the 
Church  divided  itself  into  different  sec- 
tions, according  to  the  habitations  of  its 
members,  of  which  each  section  held  its 
assemblies  in  one  particular  chamber  of 
the  house  of  some  wealthy  member  of 
the  Church ;  or,  perhaps,  while  it  was 
usual  to  unite  on  Sundays  in  one  general 
assembly,  yet  each  individual  part  of  the 
Church  met  together  daily  in  the  rooms 
which  lay  the  most  convenient  to  it.  Per- 
haps the  passages  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
which  speak  of  Churches  in  the  houses  of 
jxirlicuJar  persons.,  are  thus  to  be  under- 
stood.*    The  answer  of  Justin  Martyr,  to 

*  "  The  Church  in  his  house,"  «'  kut'  oIk'.v  uinu 
iKKKna-m.  These  passages  certainly  cannot  allude 
to  the  places  of  as.sembly  of  whole  Churches,  for 
in  many  of  them,  the  »  x«t'  oIk'^v  tivc^  'mx-Xna-ix  is 
expressly  distinguished  from  the  whole  of  the 
Church,  (1  Cor.  xvi.  19,  20.)  Herv^  we  first  have 
the  Church,  "  that  is  in  the  house"  of  Aquilas  and 
Priscllla,  and  then  "  all  the  brethren,"  which  would 
be  a  piece  of  tautolop;y  on  that  supposition.  Comp. 
Coloss.  iv.  15.  And  besides,  there  is  another  ob- 
jection to  such  an  interpretation,  which  is  this,  that 
then  we  must  suppose  Aquilas  to  have  held  the 
assemblies  of  the  Church  in  his  own  house,  both 
when  at  Rome,  his  usual  abode,  and  when  at 
Ephesus,  (comp.  Kom.  xvi.  5,  and  1  Cor.  xvi.  19.) 


the  question  of  the  preefect,  "Where  do 
you  assemble  ?"  exactly  corresponds  to 
the  genuine  Christian  spirit  on  this  point. 
This  answer  was  :  "  Where  each  can  and 
will.  You  believe,  no  doubt,  that  we  all 
meet  together  in  one  place ;  but  it  is  not 
so,  the  God  of  the  Christians  is  not  shut 
up  in  a  room,  but  being  invisible,  he  fills 
both  heaven  and  earth,  and  is  honoured 
every  where  by  the  faithful."  Justin 
adds,  that  when  he  came  to  Ptome,  he 
was  accustomed  to  dwell  in  one  particular 
spot,  and  that  those  Christians,  who  were 
instructed  by  him,*  and  wished  to  hear 
his  discourses,  assembled  at  his  house. 
He  had  not  visited  any  other  congrega- 
tions of  the  Church.f 

The  arrangements  which  the  peculiari- 
ties of  the  Christian  worship  required, 
were  gradually  made  in  these  places  of 
assembly,  such  as  an  elevated  seat  J  for 
the  purpose  of  reading  the  Scriptures  and 
preaching,  a  table  for  the  distribution  of 
the  sacrament,  to  which  as  early  as  the 
time  of  Tertullian  the  name  of  altar,  ara 
or  altare,  was  given,  and  perhaps,  not 
without  some  mixture  of  the  unevangelic 
Old  Testament  notion  of  a  sacrifice — or, 
j  at  least,  this  idea  might  easily  attach  itself 
to  this  name.  When  the  Churches  in- 
creased, and  their  circumstances  improv- 
ed, there  were,  during  the  course  of  the 
third  century,  already  separate  Church 
buildings  for  the  Christians,  as  the  name 
6§»jo-jt£wo-»|U.(/t  TOTToi  of  the  Christians  occurs 
in  the  edict  of  Gallienus.§     In  the  time 


Now  it  is  very  unlikely,  that  the  whole  Church 
should  have  changed  its  place  of  assembly  every 
time  that  Aquilas  arrived  at  either  place.  It  is  for 
more  easy  to  conceive  that  men,  whose  trade  re- 
quired a  roomy  habitation,  wherever  that  might  be, 
— such  as  that  of  Aquilas,  the  tent  maker, — gene- 

I  rally  gave  up  a  room  in  their  house  for  a  part  of 
the  Church  to  assemble  in ;  and  more  especially 
when  they  were  quahfied,  as  probably  Aquilas  was, 

1  by  their  gift  and  capacity  of  instructing,  to  serve 

[  for  the  edification  of  small  congregations. 

I      *   This  would  accordingly  be,  «  k^t  cliuv  rcu 

I      I   [This  dialogue  is  found  in  the  Act.  Mart. 

I  Sanct.  S.  Justin,  in  Ruinarl,  who  professes  to  edit 
it  after  Surius  and  others.  Papebroch  (Act.  Sanct. 
Aprilis,  vol.  ii.  p.  104.)  contends,  that  this  act  of 
martyrdom  belongs  to  a  dillerent  Justin,  and  is 
answered  by  Ruinart,  p.  .54-.'i8. — H.  J.  R.] 

\  Suggestus,  pulpitum.  [Thus  Constit.  Apost. 
ii.  57,  MST-ic  if'  0  uvajvauTT*!;  e^'  t^»Mw  Ttvz^  i^tuK' 
— H  J.  R.] 

§  See  page  82.  If  the  account  of  the  Chro- 
nicle of  Edessa  (in  Asseman,  Biblioth.  Orien- 
tal, t.  i.  391,)  is  to  be  depended  on,  a  Christian 
church  must  have  been  built  as  early  as  A.  1).  202, 
at  Edessa.  The  Chronicle  was  first  published  in 
the  sixth  century,  but  the  author  made  use  of 


NO    IMAGES    OF    CHRIST. 


183 


of  tlie  external  prosperity  of  the  Church, 
duriiifT  the  reign  of  Diocletian,  many 
handsome  churches  arose  in  the  great 
towns. 

The  use  of  images  was  originally  quite 
foreign  to  the  Christian  worship  and 
Churches,  and  it  remained  so  during  this 
whole  period.  The  intermixture  of  art 
and  religion,  and  the  use  of  images  for 
the  latter,  appeared  to  the  first  Christians 
a  heatlienish  practice.  As  in  heathenism 
the  Divine  becomes  desecrated  and  tar- 
nished by  intermixture  with  the  Natural, 
and  as  men  have  often  paid  homage  to 
the  beauties  of  nature  with  injury  to  the 
cause  of  ^loliness,  the  first  warmth  of 
Christian  zeal,  which  opposed  the  idolatry 
of  nature,  so  common  to  heatlienism,  and 
sought  to  maintain  the  Divine  in  all  its 
purity  and  elevation,  was  inclined  rather 
to  set  holiness  in  the  strongest  contrast 
with  what  is  beautiful  by  nature,  than  to 
endeavour  to  grace  it  by  lending  it  a  beau- 
tiful form.  Men  were  more  inclined  in 
general  to  carry  into  extremes  the  idea  of 
the  appearance  of  the  Divinity  in  the  form 
of  a  servant,  which  suited  the  oppressed 
condition  of  the  Church  in  these  centu- 
ries, than  to  throw  it  into  the  back  ground, 
and  overwhelm  it  under  the  predominance 
of  their  aesthetic  dispositions,  and  their 
love  of  art.  This  is  peculiarly  shown  by 
the  general  belief  of  the  early  Church, 
that  Christ  had  clothed  his  inward  Divine 
glory  in  a  mean  outward  form,  which  was 
in  direct  contradiction  to  it;  a  conclusion 
which  was  drawn  from  interpreting  the 
prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  in  Isaiah  liii.  2, 
too  literally.  Thus  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria warns  the  Christians,  from  the  exam- 
ple of  Christ,  not  to  attribute  too  much 
value  to  outward  beauty.  "The  Lord 
himself    was    mean    in    outward    form ; 

and  who  is  better  than  the  Lord  ? 

But  He  revealed  himself,  not  in  the  beauty 
of  the  body,  perceptible  to  our  senses, 
but  in  the  true  beauty  of  the  soul  as  well 
as  of  the  body ;  the  beauty  of  the  soul 
consisting  in  benevolence,  and  that  of  the 
body  in  immortality!"* 

Church-teachers  of  entirely  opposite 
habits    of  mind,    the    adherents    of  two 


older  documents,  which,  however,  if  we  may  judge 
from  the  document  about  the  letters  that  passed 
between  Christ  and  Abgarus,  cannot  have  been 
quite  authentic.  If  also  the  explanation  of  the 
passage  in  that  Chronicle,  given  by  Michaelis 
(Orientalische  und  exegetische  Bibliothek,  pt.  x. 
p.  61.)  be  just,  this  church  must  have  been  built 
according  to  the  model  of  the  Jewish  temple,  and 
divided  into  three  parts. 
*  Psedagog.  iii.  1. 


different  systems  of  conceiving  Divine 
things,  the  one  after  a  sensuous  manner, 
the  other  after  a  spiritualising  mode, — 
realists  and  idealists,  who,  from  these  op- 
posite habits  of  mind,  might  have  very 
different  views  on  this  point,  just  as  in 
later  times,  different  views  of  this  matter 
proceeded  from  such  a  fundamental  differ- 
ence in  habits  of  thought; — these  Church- 
teachers  were,  nevertheless,  united  on 
this  point  by  their  common  opposition 
to  the  mixture  of  the  natural  and  the  Di- 
vine in  heathenism,  and  by  the  endeavour 
to  maintain  the  devotion  to  God  in  spirit 
and  in  truth,  pure  and  undefiled.  Cle- 
mens of  Alexandria  is  as  little  favour- 
able as  TertuUian  to  the  use  of  images. 
He  says,  against  the  use  of  images  by 
the  heathen,  "  We  must  not  cling  to 
that  which  is  sensuous,  but  elevate  our- 
selves to  that  which  is  spiritual ;  the 
habit  of  daily  looking  upon  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  Divine  nature  dese- 
crates its  dignity;  and  to  wish  to  honour 
a  spiritual  being  by  earthly  matter,  is 
nothing  but  to  dishonour  it  by  sensuous- 
ness."  It  is  evident,  from  what  we  have 
said,  how  foreign  to  the  notions  of  the 
Christians  of  this  period,  images  of  Christ 
must  in  general  have  been.  Heathens, 
who,  like  Alexander  Severus,*  saw  some- 
thing Divine  in  Christ,  and  sects,  which 
mixed  heathenism  and  Christianity  to- 
gether, were  the  first  who  made  use  of 
images  of  Christ;  as,  for  instance,  the 
Gnostic  sect  of  the  followers  of  Carpo- 
cratian,  wiio  put  his  image  beside  those 
of  Plato  and  Aristotle. 

The  use  of  religious  images  among  the 
Christians,  did  not  proceed  from  their 
ecclesiastical,  but  from  their  domestic  life. 
In  the  intercourse  of  daily  life,  the  Chris- 
tians saw  themselves  every  where  sur- 
rounded by  objects  of  heathen  mythology, 
or  by  such  as  shocked  their  moral  aiid 
Christian  feelings.  Similar  objects  adorned 
the  walls  of  chambers,  the  drinking  vessels, 
and  the  signet  rings  (on  which  the  hea- 
then had  constantly  idolatrous  images,) 
to  which,  whenever  they  pleased,  they 
could  address  their  devotions ;  and  the 
Christians  naturally  felt  themselves  obliged 
to  replace  these  objects,  which  wounded 
their  moral  and  religious  feelings,  with 
others   more    suited    to    those    feelings. 


*  Thus  Eusebius  says,  (H.  E.  vii.  18,)  that 
heathens  were  the  first  who  made  pictures  of 
Christ,  St.  Peter,  and  St.  Paul,  whom  they  looked 
upon,  after  their  heathen  notions,  as  benefactors  of 
mankind.  This  may  easily  be  explained  from  the 
spirit  of  religious  eclecticism,  which  then  existed. 


184 


THE  CUSTOM  OF  CROSSING. — SACRED  SEASONS. 


Therefore,  they  gladly  put  the  likeness 
of  a  shepherd,  carrying  a  lamb  upon  his 
shoulders,  on  their  cups,  as  a  symbol  of 
the  Redeemer,  who  saves  the  sinners  that 
return  to  Him,  according  to  the  parable 
in  tlie  Gospel.*  And  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria says,  in  reference  to  the  signet 
rings  of  the  Christians,!  "  Let  our  signet 
rin"-s  consist  of  a  dove  (the  emblem  of 
the"  Holy  Ghost,)  or  a  fish,J  or  a  ship 
sailing  towards  heaven  (the  emblem  of 
the  Christian  Church,  or  of  individual 
Christian  souls;)  or  a  lyre  (the  emblem 
of  Christian  joy;)  or  an  anchor  (the  em- 
blem of  Christian  hope;)  and  he  who  is 
a  fisherman,  let  him  remember  the  apostle, 
and  the  children  who  are  dragged  out 
from  the  water  ;§  for  those  men  ought 
not  to  engrave  idolatrous  forms,  to  whom 
the  use  of  them  is  forbidden ;  those  can 
engrave  no  sword  and  no  bow,  who  seek 
for  peace;  the  friends  of  temperance  can- 
not engrave  drinking-cups."  And  yet, 
jierhaps,  religious  images  made  their  M^ay 
from  domestic  life  into  the  churches,  as 
early  as  the  end  of  the  third  century,  and 
the  walls  of  the  churches  were  painted  in 
the  same  way.  The  council  of  Elvira  set 
itself  against  this  innovation,  as  an  abuse, 
for  it  made  the  following  order:  "  Objects 
of  reverence  and  worship  shall  not  be 
painted   on  the  walls."||     It  is   probable 


•  Tertullian,  de  Pudicitia,  c.  vii.  "  Procedant 
ipgse  pictursE  calicum  vestrorum."  C.  x.  "  Pastor, 
quetn  in  calice  depingis."  The  likeness  of  Christ 
upon  a  cup  does  not  appear  to  have  suited  the 
Montanistic  asceticism. 

f  Paidog.  iii.  246,  247. 

i  This  refers  to  the  same  idea  as  that  of  the 
fisherman,  with  a  play  on  the  anagram  of  the 
name  of  Christ,  'ixer2 — 'lno-cv;  Xpufc;  Qku  Tioc 

2«l)T)Ig. 

§  This  was  an  allusion  to  the  Christians,  whom 
Christ,  the  Divine  teacher — the  Quof  TrcaSctyayoc 
— leads  to  regeneration  by  means  of  baptism. 

II  "  Ne,  quod  colitur  et  adoratur,  in  parietibus 
depingatur."  Concil.  Illiberit.  c.  xxxiii.*  The 
explanation  of  this  canon,  we  confess,  cannot  alto- 
gether be  determined  with  certainty.  There  is,  in 
fact,  a  double  uncertainty  in  it :  We  may  under- 
.stand  the  words, '  quod  colitur  et  adoratur,'  of  reli- 
gious objects  generally,  or  in  a  more  restricted  sense, 
of  objects  of  peculiar  reverence,  such  as  portraits  of 
Christ,  or  symbolical  representations  of  God  and 
the  Trinity ;  and  we  may  also  understand  '  the 
walls'  in  two  dilfcrent  ways — the  walls  of  churches 
or  those  of  houses. 

[*  I  find  this  to  be  Can.  xxxvi.  Those  who 
are  curious  in  these  matters,  will  be  somewhat 
eniertained  by  the  learned  note  of  Mendoza  on 
his  canon,  to  prove  that  it  refers  only  to  pictures 
of  (jod.  He  labours  hard  through  nine  folio  pages 
of  double  columns,  to  prove  this  point,  and  to  de- 
fend the  use  of  images.  Concilia  a  Labbe  et 
Cossart.    Paris,  1C71,  vol.  i.  p.  1227.— H.  J.  R.] 


that  the  visible  representation  of  the  cross 
found  its  way  very  early  into  domestic 
and  ecclesiastical  life.  This  token  was 
remarkably  common  among  them;  it  was 
used  to  consecrate  their  rising  and  their 
going  to  bed,  their  going  out  and  their 
coming  in,  and  all  tlie  actions  of  daily 
life ;  it  was  the  sign  which  Christians 
made  involuntarily,  whenever  any  thing 
of  a  fearful  nature  surprised  them.*  This 
was  a  mode  of  expressing,  by  means  per- 
ceptible to  the  senses,  the  purely  Chris- 
tian idea,  that  all  the  actions  of  Christians, 
as  well  as  the  whole  course  of  their  life, 
must  be  sanctified  by  faith  in  the  crucified 
Jesus,  and  by  dependence  upoj^Him,  and 
that  this  faith  is  the  most  powerful  means 
of  conquering  all  evil,  and  preserving  one- 
self against  it.  But  here  also  again,  men 
were  too  apt  to  confuse  the  idea  and  the 
token  which  represented  it,  and  they  at- 
tributed the  effects  of  faith  in  the  crucified 
Redeemer  to  the  outward  sign,  to  Avhich 
they  ascribed  a  supernatural,  sanctifying, 
and  preservative  power ;  an  error  of  which 
we  find  traces  as  early  as  the  third  century. 
We  now  pass  from  the  consideration 
of  the  places  of  public  worship,  to  that  of 
the  seasons  of  worship,  and  the  festivals 
of  the  early  Christians. 

(c.)  Seasons  of  Public  Worship  and  Festivals, 
It  is  here  shown  again  that  the  Gospel, 
as  it  remodelled  the  former  conceptions 
of  the  priesthood,  of  worship  in  general, 
and  of  holy  places,  also  entirely  changed 
the  then  views  of  sacred  seasons.  And, 
here  again,  also,  the  character  of  the 
theocracy  of  the  New  Testament  revealed 
itself,  a  theocracy  spiritualized,  ennobled, 
and  freed  from  its  outward  garb  of  sense, 
and  from  the  limits  which  bounded  its 
generalization.!  The  Jewish  laws  re- 
lating to  their  festivals,  were  not  merely 
abrogated  by  the  Gospel  in  such  a  man- 
ner as  to  transfer  these  festivals  to  different 
seasons,,  but  they  w^ere  entirely  abolished, 
as  far  as  fixing  religious  worship  to  par- 
ticular times  is  concerned.  The  laws  of 
tlie  Sabbath,  like  all  -the  rest  of  the  cere- 
monial laws  of  the  Jews,  could  only  arise 


'  Cf.  Tertullian,  de  Corona  Milit.  c.  iii.  [From 
the  last  words  of  this  chapter  of  Tertullian  it  would 
seem,  that  they  made  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  the 
forehead:  "Fr(>ntem  crucis  signaculo  terimus.' 
See  also  ad  Uxor.  ii.  5. — H.  J.  R.j 

f  [Von  den  Schranken  des  Particularismus 
und  von  der  fleischlichcn  Hiille  frci  gemachten 
neutestamentlichen  Thcokratie. — Germ.  Literally, 
"  freed  from'  the  limits  of  particularism,  and  from 
its  fleshly  covering." — H.  J.  R.] 


ORIGIN    OF   FESTIVALS. 


again  in  Christianity,  by  being  spirit- 
ualized and  ennobled,  inasmuch  as  ci'cry 
day  was  now  to  be  sanctified  by  the  depen- 
dence of  the  whole  life  on  God  through 
Christ,  on  every  day,  and  by  the  sanctifi- 
cation  which  the  prayers  of  the  heart 
shed  over  the  whole  of  a  Christian  day. 
Inasmuch  as  the  Cliristian  every  day  pur- 
sued the  calling  entrusted  to  him  by  God, 
with  godly  feelings,  preserving  his  heart 
in  purity  from  all  inward   contact  with 


185 

natures  in  himself,  cannot  always  maintain 
himself  to  the  carnal ;  a  dropping  down, 
which  became  constantly  more  necessary, 
tiie  more  the  fire  of  \hc  first  animation, 
and  the  warmth  of  the  first  love  of  the 
Christians,  died  away.  It  was  no  more 
unevangelic  than  the  gradual  limitation  of 
the  exercise  of  many  rights,  belonging  to 
the  common  priesthood  of  all  Christians, 
to  a  certain  class  in  the  Church,  which 
circumstances  rendered  necessary.*  But 
what  is  ungodly,  and  seeking  constantly  j  just  as  the  unevangelic  made  its  appear- 
to  keep  holy  the  name  of  his  Lord  in  j  ance,  when  men  supposed  the  existence 
thought,  Avord,  and  deed — every  day  was  '  of  a  separate  caste  of  priests  in  the  Church, 
to  be  a  true  Sabbatli  to  him.  St.  Paul  [  which  stood  upon  Divine  right,  when  they 
expressly  declares  all  sanctifying  of  cer-  '  forgot  the  common  Christian  priesthood 
tain  seasons,  as  far  as  men  deduced  this  j  in  the  consideration  of  this  peculiar  caste 
from  the  Divine  command,  to  be  JeAvish  I  of  priests,  when  they  introduced  a  con- 
and  unevangelical,  and  to  be  like  return-  ]  trast  between  secular  and  spititual  per- 
ing  to  the  slavery  of  the  law,  and  to  cap-  sons  among  Christians,  so  also,  in  this 
tivity  to  outicard  precepts.  Such  was  the  \  matter,  the  unevangelic  appeared,  when 
opinion  of  the  early  Church.  At  first  the  men  supposed  certain  days  distinguished 
Churches  assembled  every  day;  as,  for  from  others  and  hallowed  by  Divine  right, 
instance,  the  first  Church  of  Jerusalem,  j  when  they  introduced  a  distinction  be- 
which  assembled  daily  for  prayer  in  com-  tween  holy  and  common  days  into  the 
mon,  and  for  the  public  consideration  of  life  of  the  Christian,  and  in  this  distinc- 
the  Divine  word,  for  the  common  cele-  j  tion  forgot  his  calling  to  sanctify  all  days 
bration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  and  the  j  alike.  The  confusion  between  the  Old 
agapae,  as  well  as  to  maintain  the  connec-  '  and  the  New  Testament  notions  mani- 
tion  between  the  common  head  of  the  ;  fested  itself  here  in  the  same  manner  and 
spiritual  body  of  the  Church  and  them- !  at  the  same  time,  as  that  which  relates  to 
selves,  and  between  one  another  as  mem-  |  the  priesthood. 

hers  of  this  body.  Traces  of  this  are !  When  the  Montanists  (see  below) 
also  found  in  later  times,  in  the  daily  j  wished  to  introduce  and  make  imperative 
assembling  of  tlie  Churches  for  the  pur-  new  fasts,  which  were  fixed  to  certain 
pose  of  hearing  the  Scriptures  read,  and  |  days.,  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  very 
of  celebrating  the  communion.  Altliough,  properly  brought  to  oppose  them;  but 
in  order  to  meet  the  wants  of  human  na-  Tertullian,  who  stood  on  tlie  boundary 
ture  generally,  consisting  as  it  does  of  between  the  original  pure  evangelic  times 
sense  as  well  as  soul,  and  those  of  a  large  and  those  when  the  intermixture  of  Jew- 
body  of  Christians  in  particular,  who  ish  and  Christian  notions  first  took  place, 
were  only  in  a  stale  of  education,  and  |  confuses  here  the  views  of  the  two  reli- 
were  to  be  brought  up  to  the  ripeness  of  I  gions,  because  he  makes  the  evangelical 
Christian  manhood,  men  soon  selected  |  to  consist,  not  in  a  ?c/to//(/ fZ/yTfrcn/ ??ic/AofZ 
definite  times  for  religious  admonitions,  !  of  considering  festivals  altogether,  but  in 
and  to  consecrate  them  to  a  fuller  occu- 1  the  celebration  of  difi'crcnt  particular  fes- 
pation  with  religious  things,  as  well  as  to  !  tivals  ;  and  he  makes  the  Judaizing, 
public  devotion,  with  the  intention,  that  j  which  the  apostle  condemns,  to  consist 
the  influence  of  these  definite  times  should  i  only  in  the  observation  of  the  Jeivish,  in- 
animate and  sanctify  the  rest  of  their  lives,  stead  of  the  peculiarly  Christian  festivals.! 
and  that  Christians  who  withdrew  them-  j  The  weekly  and  the  yearly  festivals 
selves  from  the  distractions  of  business  i  originally  arose  from  the  selfsame  funda- 
on  these  days,  and  collected  their  hearts  '  mental  idea,  which  was  the  centre  point 
before  God  in  the  stillness  of  solitude,  as   of  the  whole  Christian  life  ;  the  idea  of 


well  as  in  public  devotion,  might  make 
these  seasons  of  service  to  the  oiher  parts 
of  their  life; — yet  this  was  in  itself.,  and 
of  itself  nothing  unevangelic.  It  was 
only  a  dropping  down  from  the  purely 
spiritual  point  of  view,  on  which  even  the 
Christian,  as  he  still  carries  about  two 
24 


imitating  Christ,  the  crucified  and  the 
risen, — to  follow  Him  in  his  death,  by 
appropriating  to  ourselves,  in  penitence 
and    faith,  the   effects  of  his  death,  by 


*   See  page  110. 

•j-  Tertullian,  Je  Jejuniis,  c.  xiv. 

q2 


186  SI 

dying  to  ourselves  and  to  the  world — to 
follow  Him  in  his  resurrection,  by  rising 
again  with  Him  by  faith  in  Him,  and  by 
his  power,  to  a  new  and  holy  life,  devot- 
ed to  God,  which,  beginning  liere  below 
in  the  seed,  is  matured  in  heaven.  Hence 
the  festival  of  joy  was  the  festival  of  the 
resurrection  ;  and  the  preparation  for  it, 
the  remembrance  of  the  suflerings  of 
Christ,  with  mortification  and  crucifixion 
of  the  flesh,  was  the  day  of  fasting  and 
pcnilencc.  Thus  in  the  week  the  Sunday 
was  the  joyful  festival ;  and  the  prepa- 
ration for  it  was  a  day  of  penitence  and 
prayer,  consecrated  to  remembrance  of 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  the  prepara- 
tions for  them,  and  this  was  celebrated  on 
the  Friday ;  and  thus  also  tlie  yearly  fes- 
tivals were  to  celebrate  the  resurrection 
of  Christ,  and  the  operations  of  the  Re- 
deemer after  He  had  risen  again  ;  the  pre- 
paration for  this  day  was  in  commemora- 
tion of  the  sufferings  and  fastings  of  our 
Saviour.  From  tliis  general  point  of  view 
we  shall  now  proceed  to  consider  the 
several  weekly  and  yearly  festivals  in 
particular. 

Opposition  to  Judaism  introduced  the 
particular  festival  of  Sunday  very  early, 
indeed,  into  the  place  of  the  Sabbath  ;  the 
first  trace  of  this  custom  is  in  the  Acts 
XX.  7,  where  we  find  the  Church  assem- 
bled together  on  the  first  day  in  the 
week,*  and  again  somewhat  lafer^  in  Rev. 
i.  10,  where  it  is  hardly  possible  to  un- 
derstand the  day  of  judgment  by  the 
words  "  the  Lord's  day."  Allusion  is 
also  made  to  the  festival  of  Sunday,  as  a 
symbol  of  new  life,  consecrated  to  the 
Lord,  in  opposition  to  the  old  Sabbath,  in 
the  episUe  of  Ignatius  to  the  Magnesians.f 
'*  If  they  who  were  brouglit  up  under  the 
Old  Testament  have  attained  to  a  new 
hope,  and  no  longer  keep  Sabbaths  holy, 
but  have  consecrated  their  life  to  the  day 
of  the  Lord,  on  which  also  our  life  rose 
up  in  Him,  how  shall  we  be  able  to  live 
without  Him  ?"  Sunday  was  distingushed 


as  a  day  of  joy  by  the  circumstances,  that 
men  did  not  fast  upon  it,  and  that  they 
prayed  standing  up,  and  not  kneeling,  as 
Christ  had  raised  up  fallen  man  to  heaven 
again  tlirough  his  resurrection.  The  fes- 
tival of  Sunday,  like  all  other  festivals, 
was  always  only  a  human  ordinance,  and 
it  was  far  from  the  intentions  of  the  apos- 
des  to  establish  a  Divine  command  in 
this  respect,  far  from  them,  and  from  the 
early  apostolic  Church,  to  transfer  the 
laws  of  the  Sabbath  to  Sunday.  Perhaps, 
at  tlie  end  of  the  second  century  a  false 
application  of  this  kind  had  begun  to  take 
place ;  for  men  appear  by  that  time  to 
have  considered  labouring  on  Sunday  as 
a  sin.* 

And  further,  two  other  days  in  the 
week,  Friday  and  Wednesday,  particularly 
the  former,  were  consecrated  to  the 
remembrance  of  the  suflerings  of  Christ, 
and  of  the  circumstances  preparatory  to 
them,  congregations  were  held  on  them, 
and  a  fast  till  three  o'clock  in  the  after- 
noon, but  nothing  was  positively  appointed 
concerning  them ;  in  respect  to  joining 
in  these  solemnities  every  one  consulted 
his  own  convenience  or  inclination.  Such 
fasts,  joined  with  prayer,  were  considered 
as  the  watches  of  the  "  milites  Christi" 
on  their  post  by  the  Christians,  (who 
compared  their  calling  to  a  warfare — the 
'  militia  Christi,)  and  they  were  "  stationes" 
— and  the  days,  on  which  they  took  place, 
were  called  "  Dies  Stationum."! 

The  Jewish  Christian  Churches,  [i.  e., 
Churches  consisting  of  Jewish  converts,] 
although  they  received  the  festival^  of 
Sunday,  retained  also  that  of  the  Sabbath  ; 
and  from  them  the  custom  spread  abroad 
in  the  Oriental  Church,  of  distinguishing 
this  day,  as  well  as  the  Sunday,  by  not 
fasting  and  by  praying  in  an  erect  posture ; 
in  tlie  Western  Churches,  particularly  the 
Roman,  where  opposition  to  Judaism  was 
the  prevailing  tendency,  this  very  opposi- 
tion produced  the  custom  of  celebrating 
the  Saturday  in  particular  as  a  fast  day  .J 


•  The  passage  is  not  entirely  convincing,  because 
the  impending  departure  of  the  apostle  may  liave 
united  the  little  Church  in  a  brotherly  parting 
meal,  on  occasion  of  which  the  apostle  delivered 
his  last  address,  although  there  was  no  particular 
celebration  of  a  Sunday  in  the  case.  The  pas.sagc 
from  1  Cor.  xvi.  2,  is  still  less  convincing  -,  for  all 
may  be  quite  competently  explained,  if  we  only 
consider  the  passage  as  referring  to  the  beginning 
of  the  civil  week. 

•j-  Sect.  9.  [I  am  unable  to  find  the  exact  ex- 
pressions here  given  ;  although  something  of  the 
kind  is  found  in  §  9.-11.  J.  R.] 


*  We  may  draw  this  conclusion  from  the  words 
of  TertuUian,  de  Orat.  §  23.  •'  Solo  die  dominico 
resurrect  ion  is  non  ab  isto  tantum  (from  kneeling) 
sed  omni  anxietatis  habitu  et  officio  cavere  debe- 
mus,  differenies  eiiam  negotia,  ne  quern  diubolo 
locum  dermis.'" 

f  The  name  "  statio"  occurs  first  in  Hermas 
Pastor,  lib.  iii.  Similitud.  v.,  and  often  in  TertuUian. 
"  Statio"  was  the  usual  name  for  these  half-fast- 
days,  in  opposition  to  the  proper  "  jejunia."  Ter- 
tullian  de  Jejuniis,  c.  xiv. 

i  TertuUian.  de  Jejun.  c.  xiv.  "  Quanquam 
vos  ctiam  sabhatum  si  quando  continuatis,  nun- 
quam  nisi  in  Paschate  jijunandum."     TertuUian, 


SABBATH.— YEARLY   FESTIVALS. 


187 


Tliis  difTerence  in  customs  would  of  |  the  unily  of  faitli  and  spirit,  in  the  bond 
course  be  striking,  where  members  of  the  '  of  love,  but  allowed  all  kinds  of  dilference 
Oriental  Cliurch  spent  their  Sabbalhday  ■  in  external  lhin<rs;  and  then  they  bejjan 
in  the  Western  Church.  It  was  only  too  to  require  unilorniity  even  in  these  things, 
soon  that  men  lost  sight  of  the  principle  i  Tertidlian  spoke;  on  this  controversy  with 
of  the  apostolic  Chuich,  which  retained  Clirisiiaii  moderation,  before  his  conver- 
j  sion  to  Montanism.     lie  said  of  the  few 

..    .    .  ^  .    .  , .  1.  »    u-   '  defenders  of  the  Oriental  custom,  "  The 

as  a  Montanist,  is  here  making  a  reproach  to  his  i  ^       i       n  l  i  ■  i 

Romish  adversaries,  that  they  deprived  the  Sab-  l^"''"  ^^1^1  bestow  his  grace  upon  them,  SO 
bath  of  its  becoming  honour;  and  sometimes  con- {  ^'^'i^  they  may  either  give  in,  or  follow 
tinued  their  fasts  from  Friday  to  the  Saturday,  '  their  own  opinion  without  bitterness 
whereas  they  ought  only  to  make  one  exception  to  towards  others.*  The  learned  Hippoly tus 
its  observance  as  a  feast,  that  is,  in  the  case  of  the  ^^as  induced,  as  early  as  the  beginning  of 
Passover  (i.  e.,  in  Easterweek.^     This  same  cus-  :  *i      .i  •    i  ,  .  •.  .i  • 

torn,  namely,  tkat  of  continuing  the  fast  from  Fri-  ■  ^^^^  '^"'"^  f  "^"^^^  ^"."'"^f  "P«'l  ^'''^  ^O"" 
day  on  to  Saturday,  which  Tertullian  here  argues  '  troversy  between  tlie  Oriental  and  the 
against,  as  a  Montanist,  we  fuid  in  Victorinus,  i  Occidental  Church.| 

bishop  of  Petabium,  in  Pannonia  (Pettau,  in  The  first  yearly  festivals  of  the  Chris- 
Stiria,)  at  the  end  of  the  third  century.  It  is  '  tians  proceeded  from  similar  vi(iws  ;  and 
mentioned  in  his  Fragments  on  the  Creation,  first  i  yet  ^^  ^^st  the  contrast,  which  had  in 
published  by  Lave,  Hist.  Lit.     He  calls  this  con-  i      »•  .i  ,  r  i    •    n 

linuance  "  superpoktio  jejunii."  The  fast  on  the  i  ^^'^J  t"^^^,  ^he  most  powerful  induence 
Sabbath  appears  here  the  preparation  for  the  festi-  '  ^ri  the  development  as  well  of  the  churchly 
valof  the  communion  on  the  Sunday,  in  opposition  hfe  as  of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  is 
to  the  Jewish  festival  on  the  Sabbath,  which  here  peculiarly  prominent — I  mean  the 
Christianity  had  abolished.  "  Hoc  die  solemus  !  contrast  between  the  Jewish  Churches 
superponere;  idcirco  ut  die  dominico  cum  gratia-  I  a„d  those  of  the  Gentile  converts.  The 
rum  actione  ad  panem  (the  Lord  s  Supper)  exea-  ir  .-       ini       t       -iz-x-i 

mus.  Et  parasceue  superpositio  fiat,  ne  quid  cum  |  ^'''''}^'  yef^n^ed  all  the  Jewish  festivals  as 
Juda-is  Sabbatum  observare  videamur."  Galland.  i  "^^'ell  as  the  whole  ceremonial  law, although 
Bibl.  Patr.  T.  iv. ;  and  Routh,  Reliquiae  Sacrae, ,  hy  degrees  they  introduced  into  them  a 
Oxon,  1815,  vol.  iii.  p.  237.  Christian  meaning  Avhich  spontaneously 

The  council  of  Elvira  opposes  the  error  of  cele-  offered  itself  On  the  contrary,  there  was 
bratmg  the  Sabbath  as  a  festival,  by  prolonging  the  ,  probably  no  yearly  festival  at  all,  from  the 
fast  of  the  Friday,  and  making  a  fastday  of  featur-    !       •      •  '  -^   ,       ,        ,         ' 

day  also-c.  xxvi.  «  Errorem  placuit  corrigi,  ut  I  beginning,  among  the  heathen  converts, 
orani  sabbati  die  superpositiones  celebremus."—  *<^''  "o  trace  of  any  thing  of  the  sort  is 
When  in  later  days  men  had  lost  sight  of  the  origi- t  found  in  the  whole  of  the  New  Testa- 
iial  notions  of  the  first  Christian  ages,  and  were  1  ment.t 

unable  to  find  the  reason  for  the  custom  of  tasting;  The  Passover  of  the  Old  Testament 
on  the  Sabbath  (Saturday,)  in  the  Romish  Church,  I, ^^g  ^^^jly  ennobled   and   converted   to  a 

Passover  which  suited  the  New  Testa- 
ment, by  merely  substituting  the  idea  of 
deliverance  from  spiritual  bondage,  that 
[*  The  reader  win  observe  that  Sabbath,  in  this  lis    from    the   slavery   of  sin,   for   that  of 
note,  is  used  lor  Saturday,  as  the  .Jewish  Sabbath.  '   i  ,•  /-  ii     >        i         c      rm 

Dr.  Neander  appears  to  have  deduced  the  proper  \  delivereuce  irom  earthly  bondage.^  Fhe 
sense  from  the  passage  of  Tertullian,  which  is  not,  I  paschal  lamb  was  a  type  oi"  Christ,  by 
however,  without  its  difficulties,  especially  in  its  I 
immediate  context.  I  beg  to  refer  to  the  notes  of  "' 
Valesiiis  on  Eusebius,  v.  24,  which  will  throw 
some  light  on  the  subject,  and  also  to  Thorndike 
on  Reliijious  Assemblies,  p.  274.  The  following 
aract  Irom  Bishop  Kaye,  on  Tertullian,  (p.  40'J, 


they  began  to  invent  stories  to  explain  it ;  as,  for 
in.stance,  that  St.  Peter  had  fasted  on  that  day,  as 
a  preparation  for  his  dispute  with  Simon  Magus.* 


*  C.  xxiii.  de  Oratione. 

f  Cf.  Hieronymi  Ep.  Ixxii.  ad  Vital. 

+  In  1  Cor.  V.  7,  there  is  no  allusion  at  all  to  a 
first  edition,)  will  serve  in  part  to  confirm  as  well  J  peculiar   Christian    Passover   of    the    Corinthian 
as  explain  Dr.  Neander's  note  :  "  Even  the  Mon-  [  Church,  but  merely  a  contrast  shown  between  a 
taiiists.  anxious  as  they  were  to  introduce  a  more  j  purification  of  the  heart,  proceeding  from  faith,  and 
rigorous  discipline  in  the  observance  of  fasts  ^yhcn  \  the  oufwurd  Jewish  festivals.     iBut  St.  Paul  in 
they  kept  their  two  weeks  ot  Xeropliagia!,  did  not  i  if'„,    ,.,.;   a    ......      «  n  ,»  r  ..  -n  .  »  tt^    /. 

last  on  the  Saturday  and  Sunday.  The  Saturday  '  ..^'p  ,  '  '"^r-  "  ^"'/•"'l"  l^ri-.V  «' ^?A.^'«5 
before  Easterday  was,  however,  an  exception;  I  ""V  ■' f'!'f««'-  Now  this  is  worth  observing : 
that  ims  observed  as  a  fast.  The  custom  of  ob-  "'^  '**  writing  to  a  Church  among  the  Heathen,  and 
serving  every  Saturday  as  a  fast,  which  became  |  reckons  by  this  feast.  May  we  not  suppose  from 
general  throughout  the  Western  Church,  docs  not  \  this,  that  the  Heathen  converts  made  this  season 
appear  to  have  existed  in  Tertullian's  time.     That    a  solemn  time  also,  and  reckoned   their  years  in 

men  who,  like  our  author,  on  all  occasions  con-  '  some  decree  by  it ' H   J  R  1 

tended  that  the  ritual  and  ceremonial  law  of  Moses  j  ^  ^he  Alexandrians",  who'  translated  the  word 
had  ceased,  should  observe  the  seventh  day  of  the  .     .         t.   „  i    i    i       ^    c       i  •     .i 

week  as  a  festival,  is  perhaps  to  be  ascribed  to  a  !  ^^'^^^  ^'^  «§^«  fif  "J"?/^^.  haJ  already  found  in  the 
desire  of  conciliatinsi  the  Jewish  converts."  I  Passover  a  .xymhol  of  the  St^Rxcru  .tto  t'.u  itiab^T-.u 

Inanotconthispassage.BishopKaye  remarks,  I  «'<^ '^'-'  >"'"tov,  a  deliverance  of  the  spirit  from   the 
that  the  Gentiles  fasted  on  a  Saturday .—H.  J.  R.]  I  bondage  of  the  senses. 


188 


CHRISTIAN    PASSOVER  —ANICETUS    AND     POLYCARP. 


whom  tlat  deliverance  was  wrought. 
These  representations  went  on  the  suppo- 
sition tliat  CInhit  liad  partaken  his  last 
meal  with  his  disciples,  as  a  proper  Pass- 
over, at  the  very  time  that  tlie  Jews  were 
celebrating  theirs.  This  Passover  was, 
therefore,  always  celebrated  on  the  night 
between  the  14th  and  15th  of  the  Jewish 
month  Nisan,  as  a  remembrance  at  the 
same  time  of  the  last  supper  of  Christ. 
Tliis  was  tlie  fundamental  notion  of 
the  whole  Jewish-Christian  Passover,  on 
which  all  the  rest  was  built.  The  day 
following  this  Passover  was  consecrated 
to  the  remembrance  of  the  sufierings  of 
Christ,  and  tlie  third  day  from  it  to  the 
remembrance  of  his  resurrection.  On  the 
contrary,  in  the  greater  number  of  heathen 
Churches,  as  soon  as  men  began  to  cele- 
brate yearly  festivals  (a  time  which  can- 
not be  determined  very  precisely,)  they 
followed  the  method  observed  in  tlie 
weekly  festivals.  They  appointed  one 
Sunday  in  the  year  for  the  festival  of  the 
Resurrection,  and  one  Friday  as  a  day  of 
penitence  and  fasting  preparatory  to  this 
Sunday,  in  remembrance  of  the  sufferings 
of  Christ;  and  they  gradually  lengthened 
this  time  of  penitence  and  fasting,  as  a 
preparation  for  that  high  and  joyful  fes- 
tival. \n  these  Churches  they  were  more 
inclined  to  take  up  a  kind  of  antithetical 
turn  against  tlie  Jewish  festivals,  than  to 
graft  Christian  ones  upon  them.  It  was 
far  from  their  notions  to  think  of  observ- 
ing a  yearly  Passover  with  the  Jews. 
The  following  was  the  view  which  they 
took  of  the  matter.  Every  typical  feast 
has  lost  its  true  meaning  by  the  realiza- 
tion of  that  which  is  typified ;  in  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ,  the  Lord's  Supper,  as 
the  feast  of  the  new  covenant,  has  taken 
the  place  of  that  of  the  old  covenant. 
Men  seem  here  to  liave  been  inclined,  in 
their  opposition  to  Judaism,  to  come  to 
the  following  opinion,  for  which  they 
might  bring  at  laist  "  prima  facie"  evi- 
dence from  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
namely,  that  our  Saviour  did  not  celebrate 
the  last  Supper  at  the  same  time  with  tlie 
Jews,  but  one  day  earlier. 

Tliis  difference  of  outward  customs, 
between  the  Jewish-Christian  Churches 
and  the  Churches  allied  to  them,  on 
the  yne  hand,  and  the  Heathen-Christian 
Churches  foimdcd  by  St.  Paul,  on  the 
other,  existed  at  first  without  its  being 
supposed  that  external  things  of  this  na- 
ture were  of  importance  enough  to  lead 
to  a  controversy  :  they  thought,  that  the 
kingdom  of  God  did  not  consist  in  eating 


and  drinking,  or  in  any  kind  of  external 
things. 

This  difference,  together  with  many 
others,  between  the  Churches  of  Asia 
Minor  and  the  Romish  Church,  was  first 
discussed  on  occasion  of  a  visit  paid  by 
Polycarp,  the  bishop  of  Smyrna,  to  Ani- 
cetus,  the  bishop  of  Rome.*  Polycarp 
appealed  to  having  celebrated  such  a 
Passover  with  St.  John,  whose  disciple 
he  was  ;  Anicetas,  on  the  other  hand,  ap- 
pealed to  the  circumstance,  tliat  his  pre- 
decessors, (in  a  Chnrch  consisting  of 
heathen  converts,  who  followed  St.  Paul) 
had  established  nothing  of  the  sort.|  But 
as  it  was  not  supposed  that  the  apostles 
had  entirely  coincided  in  such  external 
things,  or  thought  that  uniformity  in  J^hese 
things  was  necessary,  it  was  thought  that 
differences  in  these  respects  might  con- 
tinue without  prejudice  to  Christian  com- 
munion and  unity.  As  a  proof  that  the 
bond  of  unity  was  not  broken  by  this, 
nor  by  other  diflerences,  it  would  seem, 
of  still  greater  importance,  Anicetus  al- 
lowed Polycarp  to  celebrate  the  commu- 
nion in  his  Church  instead  of  himself. 

In  later  years,  about  A.  D.  171,  this  dif- 
ference again  became  the  subject  of  con- 
troversy :  Melito  of  Sardis,  writing  appa- 
rently for  the  Jewish-Christian  custom, 
and  Appollinaris    of   Hierapolis,  against 


*  At  all  events  we  may  concluile  from  the  words 
of  Irenseus,  recorded  by  Eusebius,  that  the  deter- 
mination of  the  controversy  about  Easter  was  not 
the  object  of  Polycarp's  journey  to  Rome;  no  con- 
troversies were  as  yet  in  existence  on  the  subject, 
and  it  was  only  incidentally,  in  touching  on  other 
controversies,  that  this  was  also  treated  of.  It  is 
not  at  all  clear  either,  although  it  is  possible,  that 
a  deliberation  on  those  other  points  of  difference 
was  the  object  of  this  journey.  More  importance 
has  been  attached  at  times  to  this  journey,  than  is 
warranted  by  history. 

-j-  It  is  a  pity  that  Eusebius  has  not  given  us 
the  whole  of  the  letter  of  Irenseus;  all  depends  on 
what  we  supply  to  the  words  Tn^ttv  and  ^;)  th^siv; 
something  must  be  supplied,  wliich  formed  the 
whole  subject  of  the  controversy,  and  which  makes 
its  appearance  in  the  letter  of  Polycratns  of 
Ephesus,  preserved  by  Eusebius,*  namely,  t»v 
TSfl-(ra^!(7K«(/w*T)(v  Tit/  TTxa-^ci;  i.  e.,  the  celebration 
of  (he  \Uh  day  of  Nisan,  as  the  day  of  the  Pass- 
over ;  and  it  depended  on  the  observance  ot  this 
day,  whether  the  Passover  was  kept  or  not.  If  a 
man  did  not  trouble  himself  about  the  Mth  day 
of  Nisan,  he  considered  the  old  feast  of  the  Pass- 
over utterly  abolished,  and  deduced  his  Christian 
paschal  festival  from  a  totally  different  view  of  the 
case. 


*  [Euseb.  V.  24.  The  notes  of  Valesius  on  this 
letter  are  vefv  valuable  :  I  have  already  reicrred 
'  to  them  on  the  subject  of  lasting  on  Saturday. 
—II.  J.  R.] 


POINTS    IN   DISPUTE. 


it.*  But  still  there  was  no  rupture  of  the 
Churches  on  this  account :  individual 
Christians  out  of  Churches,  where  tlie 
Passover  was  celebrated  after  the  Jewish 
notions,  found  a  brotherly  reception  in 
Rome,  were  allowed  to  celebrate  the  Pass- 
over tliere  according  to  their  own  opi- 
nions, and  were  still  admitted  to  the  com- 
munion. Things  remained  in  this  state 
till  the  time  of  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome.t 

But  under  this  bishop,  about  A.  D.  190, 
the  controversy  broke  out  afresh  :  on  the 
one  side  was  ranged  the  Church  of  Rome, 
in  agreement  with  those  of  Cfcsarea  in 
Palestine,  Jerusalem,  Tyre,  and  Alexan- 
dria 5  on  the  other  were  the  Churches  of  ! 
Asia  Minor,  at  the  head  of  which  was  j 
Polycrates,  the  bishop  of  Ephesus.J  j 

The  points  which  were  controverted  on  | 
this  occasion,  were  the  following : 

(1.)  Must  the  yearly  Passover  be  re- [ 
tained,  and  must  we,  therefore,  follow  the  | 
Jews  in  regard  to  the  time  of  celebrating  I 
this  festival }  j 

The  opponents  of  this  opinion — at  least 
Apollinaris,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and 
Hippolytus,  according  to  the  fragments 
preserred  in  the  Alexandrian  Chronicle, 
which  we  are  not  entitled  to  declare  spu- 
rious— maintained  the  following  position : 
That  the  last  supper  of  Jesus  was  no 
Passover ;  for,  according  to  the  account 
in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  Jesus  kept  it 
on  the  ]3th  Nisan,  and  on  the  following 
day,  which  was  appointed  for  the  Jewish 
Passover,  He  offered  up  that  sacrifice  for 
mankind,  which  was  typified  by  the  Pass- 
over, and  thence  there  is  the  less  reason  to 
suppose  it  possible  that  Christians  should 
celebrate  any  festival  of  the  Passover. 

(2.)  When  the  Jewish-Christian  party 
appointed  the  day  after  the  Passover  for 


189 


the  commemoration  of  the  sufferings  of 
Christ,  let  it  fall  on  what  day  of  the  week 
it  might;  the  other  party  answered,  it  must 
always  he  on  a  Friday. 

(3.)  When  the  one  party  appointed  the 
third  day  after  the  Passover  lor  the  com- 
memoration of  the  resurrection,  let  it  fall 
on  what  day  of  the  week  it  might;  the 
other  party  settled  that  this  must  take 
place  on  a  Sunday. 

(4.)  While  the  one  party  was  keeping 
its  festival  of  the  Passover,  the  other 
party  took  an  exactly  opposite  turn  ;  for 
they  were  at  this  very  time  preparing 
themselves  for  the  celebration  of  the  suf- 
ferings of  Christ,  by  means  of  a  day  of 
penitence  and  fasting;  and  this  time  of 
contrition  only  ended  with  their  partaking 
of  the  communion  on  the  morning  of  the 
feast  of  the  resurrection.* 

The  Romish  bishop,  animated  by  the 
hierarchical  spirit  which  we  have  before 
observed  in  the  Romish  Church,  re- 
nounced communion  with  the  Churches 
of  Asia  Minor,  in  consequence  of  this 
insignificant  difference ;  but  this  unchris- 
tian conduct  must  have  experienced  a 
strong  opposition  from  the  unevangelical 
spirit  which  then  existed.  Ireneeus  wrote 
him  a  letter  in  the  name  of  the  Churches 
of  Lyons  and  Vienne,  in  which  he  blamed 
this  conduct  severely.  He  holds  up  the 
example  of  his  predecessor  Anicetus  to 
shame  Victor,  and  declares  to  hini,  "  We 
live  together  in  peace,  without  regarding 
these  differences  ;  and  the  difference  in 
our  regulations  about  the  fasts,  makes 
our  agreement  in  faith  shine  forth  more 
clearly."  In  the  same  letter,  or  in  an- 
other work  composed  in  consequence  of 
these  controversies,  he  says,  "  The  apos- 
tles commanded  us  to  judge  no  man  in 


*   Euseb.  iv.  26. 

•j-  From  the  circumstance  that  Irenaeus,  in  his 
letter  to  Victor,  represents  only  the  Romish  bishops 
before  Soter  as  models  of  toleration,  I  formerly  con- 
cluded, that  under  this  latter  (Soter)  things  had 
immediately  been  changed;  but  if  we  observe  that 
in  Irenajus  the  words  01  (tt^o)  SaxTJigoc  Trgtr/ivri^u 
and  01  TT^o  <rw  TTgiT&uri^'jt  correspond  to  each  other, 
we  shall  see  clearly  that  no  particular  weight  can 
be  attached  to  the  first  expression.  Irenaeus  only 
means  to  say  thus  much:  this  difTcrence  of  opi- 
nion, and  therefore,  this  toleration,  did  not  first 
begin  under  the  later  bishops,  but  were  in  existence 
before  Soter. 

t  It  might,  perhaps,  surprise  us  to  find  the 
Churches  of  Palestine  on  this  side,  but  we  must 
recollect  that  the  Church  of  Cajsarea,  from  the 
very  beginning,  had  consisted  chiefly  of  heathen 
converts,  and  that  the  Church  of  .Jerusalem  had 
assumed  more  of  the  Heathen-Christian  form 
during  the  reign  of  Hadrian. 


*  The  tf/«TstJa?  urrccrroKUiu,  quoted  by  Epipha- 
nius,  Hreres.  Ixx.  §  11,  which  appear  to  be  very 
different  from  those  that  remain  to  us,  wished  to 
moderate  this  opposition,  and  to  defend  the  fol- 
lowers of  the  Jewish-Christian  custom  against  the 
reproach  of  Judaism ;  and,  therefore,  they  repre- 
sented the  case  as  if  the  Jewish  Passover  (comp. 
Deut.  xvi.  3,)  were  a  meal  of  humiliation,  and 
the  Christian  a  festival  of  joy ;  as  if  the  fast  of 
the  Christians,  on  the  following  day,  on  which  the 
Jews  had  crucified  the  Redeemer,  exactly  corres- 
ponded to  the  Jewish  meal  of  joy.  The  apostles 
say,  "  While  the  Jews  are  holding  their  feast,  you 
must  fast  and  mourn  on  their  account,  because 
they  crucified  Christ  on  the  day  of  their  fcjist;  but 
while  they  are  fasting,  eating  their  unleavened 
bread  with  bitter  herbs,  you  are  to  hold  your  fivut." 
'OT:tv  iKinoi  t'ua^^mTiti,  Cult;  vnT'Tej-.vrK  im^ 


■J.jT'jfl 
TTXU- 


TrlKPKTlY, 


CHRISTMAS-DAY    AND   THE   EPIPHANY. 


190 

respect  of  meats  or  drink,  or  fasts,  new 
ixioons,  or  Sabbaths.  Whence,  then,  come 
controversies  }  whence  divisions  ?  We 
celebrate  feasts,  but  in  tlie  leaven  of  wick- 
edness and  evil,  because  we  divide  the 
Cliurch  of»God,  and  observe  outward 
matters,  while  we  leave  the  weightier 
matters  of  love  and  faith  untouched.  We 
have,  nevertheless,  learned  from  the  pro- 
phets, that  such  feasts  and  such  fasts  are 
displeasing  to  the  Lord."  We  observed 
before,  that  a  fast  formed  the  introduction 
to  the  Passover,  and  this  was  the  only 
fast  formerly  established  by  the  Chuch. 
The  necessity  of  this  fast  was  deduced 
from  Matt.  ix.  15,  but  it  was  by  a  carnal 
interpretation  of  the  passage,  and  an  ap- 
plication of  it  quite  contrary  to  its  real 
sense.*  The  duration  of  this  fast,  how- 
ever, was  not  determined ;  the  imitation 
of  the  temptation  of  our  Lord  for  forty 
days  introduced  the  custom  of  fasting 
forty  hours  in  some  places,  which  after- 
wards was  extended  to  forty  days,|  and 
thus  the  fast  of  forty  days,  the  quadra- 
gesimal fast  arose. 

The  festival  of  Pentecost  {Whitsuntide) 
■was  closely  connected  with  that  of  the 
resurrection,  and  this  was  dedicated  to 
commemorating  the  first  visible  effects  of 
the  operations  of  the  glorified  Christ  upon 
human  nature,  now  also  ennobled  by  him, 
the  lively  proofs  of  his  resurrection  and 
reception  into  glory;  and  therefore,  Origen 
joins  llie  festivals  of  the  resurrection  and 
of  Pentecost  together  as  one  whole.]] 
The  means  of  transition  from  an  Old 
Testament  festival  to  one  befitting  the 
New  Testament,  were  here  near  at  hand. 
The  first-fruits  of  harvest  in  the  kingdom 
of  nature — the  first  fruits  of  harvest  in  the 
kingdom  of  grace — the  law  of  the  ktter 
from  Mount  Sinai — the  new  law  of  the 


•  The  passage  does  not  relate  to  the  time  of 
Christ's  sufTering,  but  to  the  time  when  he  should 
be  with  his  disciples  no  more.  As  long  as  they 
enjoyed  his  society  they  were  to  give  themselves 
up  to  joy,  and  to  be  disturbed  in  it  by  no  forced 
asceticism.  But  a  time  of  sorrow  was  to  follow 
this  time  of  joy,  although  only  for  a  season,  after 
which  a  time  of  higher  and  imperishable  joy,  in 
invisible  communion  with  Him,  was  to  follow. 
John  xvi.  22. 

•j-  Irenaius  ap.  Eusel).  v.  24. 

i  Origen,  c.  Ccls.  viii.  c.  xxii.,  (p.  392,  cd. 
Spenc.)  where  he  places  the  yearly  festivals  of  the 
frxa-^-x  and  the  TriVTitx.'.Trn,  with  the  weekly  festi- 
vals, the  Tru^to-tauxi  and  the  Ku^mnxt,  and  consider- 
ing the  festival  of  the  resurrection  as  the  beginning 
of  that  of  Whitsuntide,  he  says,  "He  who  can 
truly  assert,  '  God  hath  raised  us  again  with  him, 
and  pl.iccd  us  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,'  keeps 
one  continual  Passover." 


Spirit  from  the  heavenly  Jerusalem.  This 
festival  originally  embraced  the  whole 
season  of  fifty  days  from  Easter,  and  was 
celebrated  like  a  Sunday,  that  is  to  say, 
no  fasts  were  kept  during  the  whole  of  it, 
and  men  prayed  standing,  and  not  kneel- 
ing, and  perhaps,  also  in  some  places 
assemblies  of  the  Church  were  held,  and 
the  communion  was  celebrated  everyday.* 
Afterwards  two  peculiar  points  of  time,  the 
ascension  of  Christ  and  the  effusion  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  were  selected  from  this  whole 
interval. 

These  were  the  only  festivals  generally 
celebrated  at  that  time,  as  the  passage  cited 
from  Origen  proves.  The  fundamental 
notion  of  the  whole  Christian  life,  which 
referred  every  thing  to  the  suffering,  the 
resurrection,  and  the  glorification  of  Christ, 
as  well  as  the  adherence,  or,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  opposition  to  the  Jewish  cele- 
bration of  festivals,  were  the  cause,  that 
these  were  tlie  only  general  festivals.  The 
notion  of  a  birthday  festival  was  far  from 
the  ideas  of  the  Christians  of  this  period  in 
general ;  they  looked  upon  the  second 
birth  as  the  true  birth  of  men.  The  case 
must  have  been  somewhat  diflerent  with 
the  birtii  of  the  Redeemer;  human  nature 
was  to  be  sanctified  by  him  from  its  first 
development;  but  then  this  last  notion 
could  not  at  first  come  so  prominently 
forward  among  the  early  Christians,  be- 
cause so  many  of  them  were  first  converted 
to  Christianity  when  well  advanced  in 
years,  after  some  decisive  excitement  of 
their  life,  but  then  it  may  have  entered 
generally  into  domestic  life,  though  at  first 
gradually.  Nevertheless,  we  find  in  this 
period  apparently  one  trace  of  Christmas 
as  a  festival.  Its  history  is  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  history  of  a  kindred  festi- 
val :  the  festival  of  tiie  Manifestation  of 
Jesus  in  his  character  of  Messiah,  his  con- 
secration to  the  office  of  Messiah  by  the 
baptism  of  John,  and  the  beginning  of  his 
public  ministry,  as  the  Messiah,  which 
afterwards  called  the  eo^t»  ruv  'nn<pa.vtiuv^ 
or  T»j;  iTntpotvucti  tov  XpurTof.  We  find  in 
later  times  that  these  festivals  extended 
themselves  in  opposite  directions,  that  of 
Christmas  spreading  from  the  west  to  east, 


*  From  Tertullian,  de  Oratione,  c.  xxiii.,  where 
he  had  said  that  men  abstain  from  worldly  business 
on  Sunday,  and  where  he  afterwards  attributes  the 
whole  solemnities  of  Sunday  to  the  Pentecost,  wc 
might  be  led  to  suppose  that  this  abstinence  from 
worldly  business  lasted  during  the  whole  time  of 
Pentecost,  which  is  hard  to  believe.  In  his  treatise 
dc  Idololatria,  c  xiv.,  where  he  wishes  to  restrain 
Christians  from  participating  in  heathen  feasts,  he 


CHRISTMAS-DAY    AND   THE    EPIPHANY. 


191 


and  the  other  from  east  to  west.*  Clement 
of  Alexandria  merely  relates,  that  the 
Gnostic  sect  of  the  Basilidians  celebrated 
the  festival  of  the  Epiphany  at  Alexandria, 
in  his  time.  We  can  hardly  snppose  that 
this  sect  invented  the  festival,  although 
they  may  have  had  some  dogmatical  rea- 
sons for  celebrating  it,  for  it  is  highly  im- 
probable that  the  Catholic  Church  should 
have  afterwards  received  a  festival  from  the 
Gnostics;  and  these  Gnostics  most  proba- 
bly received  it  from  the  Jewish-Christian 
Ciiurches  in  Palestine  or  Syria.  It  had  ap- 
parently a  Jewish-Christian  origin,  for  this 
time  of  our  Saviour's  life  would  appear  the 
most  important  to  the  notions  of  the  Jew- 
ish-Christians ;  and  the  Gnostics  would 
afterwards  explain  it  accordinirto  their  own 
ideas.  Clement  speaks  at  the  same  time 
of  those  who  attempted  to  fix  not  only  the 
year,  but  even  the  day  of  our  Saviour's 
birth ;  but  he  appears  to  blame  this  pro- 
ceeding, as  an  idle  and  unfruitful  pursuit, 
in  which  they  could  arrive  at  no  certainty. 
He  does  not.  however,  say,  that  they  cele- 
brated the  day  which  they  attempted  to 
fix  as  a  festival;  but  it  is  still  probable 
that  if  they  reckoned  the  day  so    accu- 


says,  "  Excerpe  singulas  solemnitates  nationum, 
Pentecostum  iraplere  non  poterunt."  The  first 
trace  of  a  limitation  of  the  Pentecostal  festival  to 
one  day,  is  in  the  43d  Canon  of  the  Council  of 
Elvira.  This  canon  is,  we  confess,  very  obscure; 
but  the  most  natural  interpretation  of  it  is  by  sup- 
posing that  some  persons  had  selected  only  the 
festival  of  the  ascension  out  of  the  whole  Pentecost. 
On  the  contrary,  under  the  name  of  Pentecost,  the 
council  only  understood  the  festival  of  the  Effusion 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  ordered  that  the  50th  day 
after  Easter  should  he  kept  holy,  and  accused  the 
first  mentioned  party,  who  had  only  made  a  false 
application  of  the  name  Pentecost,  of  having  de- 
parted from  the  authority  of  Scripture,  "  L't  cuncti 
diem  Pentccostes  post  Pascha  celebremus,  non 
quadragesimam,  nisi  quinquagesimam." 

*  The  feast  of  the  Epiphany,  as  the  festival  of 
the  baptism  of  Christ,  was  held  in  great  reverence 
at  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  at  Anfioch,  while 
the  introduction  of  the  festival  of  Chritsmas,  which 
came  from  the  west,  found  great  opposition  there. 
In  many  of  the  eastern  Churches,  where  Christ- 
mas was  first  introduced  at  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century,  or  even  later,  but  where  the  festival  of  the 
baptism  of  Christ  had  long  been  known,  they 
joined  the  two  festivals  together  afterwards ;  as  in 
the  western  Churches  they  gave  a  somewhat  dif- 
ferent turn  to  the  new  festival  of  llie  Epiphany, 
which  came  to  them  from  the  east.  The  Donatists 
rejected  the  Epijjhany,  as  an  innovation  that  came 
from  the  eastern  Churches:  "Quia  nee  oriental! 
ecclesiffi,  ubi  a[)(>aruit  ilia  stella,  communicant,"' 
Augustin.  Sermo  202.  §  2.  I  mention  this  now 
rather  prematurely,  but  merely  in  some  degree  as  a 
proof  of  the  supposition  I  have  thrown  out,  and  I 
shall  have  to  enlarge  on  the  matter  in  the  succeed- 
ing period. 


j  rately,  they  celebrated  it  as  a  festival,  and 
I  the  Gontext  of  the  passage  in  which  it  is 
mentioned  seems  to  indicate  that  Clement 
had  some  meaning  of  this  sort.*  But 
then  tliis  could  not  have  been  done  by 
the  Gnostics,  of  whom  he  speaks  imme- 
diately afterwards,  for  the  celebration  of 
the  birthday  of  our  Saviour  would  have 
been  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  rest  of 
their  system. 

We  proceed  now  to  consider  the  se- 
veral parts  of  the  Christian  worship. 

(d.)   On  the  several  parts  of  the  Christian 
Worship. 

The  character  of  a  spiritual  worship  of 
God  distinguished  the  Christian  worship 
from  that  of  other  religions,  which  con- 
sisted in  symbolical  pageantry  and  lifeless 
ceremonies.  As  a  general  elevation  of 
the  spirit  and  the  heart  to  God,  as  well  as 
the  enlightenment  of  the  spirit  and  the 
sanctification  of  tlie  heart,  were  the  ob- 
ject of  every  thing  in  this  religion,  in- 
struction and  edification,  through  a  com- 
mon study  of  the  Divine  word,  and 
through  prayer  in  common,  were  tlie  lead- 
ing features  in  the  Christian  worship. 
And  in  this  respect  it  might  in  its  form 
adhere  to  the  arrangements  made  about 
the  congregations  in  the  Jewish  syna- 
gogues, in  which  also  the  element  of  a 
spiritual  religious  worship  was  the  pre- 
vailing ingredient.  As  the  reading  of  por- 
tions of  the  Old  Testament  had  formed 
the  groundwork  of  religious  instruction 
in  the  Jewish  synagogues,  this  custom 
also  passed  into  the  Christan  congrega- 
tions. First  the  Old  Testament,  and  es- 
pecially tiie  prophetic  parts  of  it,  were 
read  as  things  that  pointed  to  the  Messiah  ; 
then  followed  the  Gospels,  and  after  that 
the  Epistles  of  the  apostles. 

The  reading  of  the  Scriptures  was  of 


*  (Clemens,  Stromat.  i.  p.  340  :  iloi  it  o!  Trepup- 
■yiTif-.v  Til  yivij-ii  Tcy  !ra>T>ipit  iijuwv  cu  /u'^i/ov  t»  irc^, 
u\?.a.  KXt  Tiiv  >)fxif-j.v  ^fi:aTi(ti\ne;,  ci  Si  <'-7rc  /ixa-ixcScu 

Kit  T'jV  li-XTntTfA-JLTCi  itilTiU  TJIV  HjUlflUV  icpn^'-U^I. 

I  [The  Christian  f  stivals,  as  compared  with 
those  of  the  Jews  and  the  heathen,  are  succinctly 
considered  in  an  essay  by  Dr.  Ullman,  appended 
to  Creuzer's  SymboUk>.  vol.  iv.  There  are  some 
interesting  remarks  in  this  essay,  but  it  does  not 
profess  to  treat  the  subject  with  chronological  ac- 
curacy. The  work  of  Augusti  is  the  grand  store- 
house of  information  on  this  point.  Denkwiirdig- 
keiten  aus  der  Chiistlichen  Archaologie.  Leips.  8 
vols.  1817 — 1826:  For  those  who  do  not  read 
German,  the  work  of  Bingham  gives  the  fullest 
account  of  these  matters.  The  little  Ireitisc  also 
of  Thorndike  on  the  Service  of  God  at  Religious 
Assemblies,  is  excellent,  but  it  is,  unfortunately,  a 
scarce  book. — li.  J.  R.l 


SCRIPTURES    READ — INTERPRETERS, 


192 


still  greater  consequence  then,  because  it 
was  desirable  that  every  Christian  should 
be  acquainted  with  them,  and  yet,  by  rea- 
son of  tlie  rarity  and  dearness  of  manu- 
scripts, and  tlie  poverty  of  a  great  pro- 
portion of  tlie  Christians — or,  perhaps, 
also,  because  all  were  not  able  to  read — 
the  Bible  itself  could  not  be  put  into  the 
hands  of  all.  Frequent  hearing  was, 
therefore,  with  many  to  supply  the  place 
of  their  own  reading.  The  Scriptures 
were,  therefore,  read  in  the  language  which 
all  could  understand,  and  that  was,  in 
most  parts  of  the  Roman  empire,  the 
Greek  or  the  Latin.  In  very  early  times 
different  translations  of  the  Bible  into 
Latin  were  in  existence  ;  as  every  one, 
wlio  knew  a  little  of  Greek,  found  it  need- 
ful to  make  the  word  of  God  his  own  in 
the  language  to  which  he  was  accus- 
tomed.* Where  the  Greek  or  the  Latin 
language  was  understood  only  by  a  part 
of  the  Church,  that  is  to  say,  by  the  edu- 
cated classes,  while  the  rest  understood 
only  their  native  language,  as  was  the 
case  in  many  Egyptian  and  Syrian  towns. 
Church  interpreters!  were  appointed,  as 
in  the  Jewish  synagogues,  and  they  im- 
mediately translated  what  had  been  read 
into  the  language  of  the  country,  so  that 
it  might  be  intelligible  to  all.J 

After  the  reading  of  the  Scripture  there 
followed,  as  there  had  previously  in  the 
Jewish  synagogues,  short,  and  at  first 
very  simple  addresses  in  familiar  lan- 
guage, the  momentary  effusions  of  the 
heart,  which  contained  an  explanation  and 
application  of  what  had  just  been  read. 
Justin  Martyr  expresses  himself  thus  on 
the  subject  :§  "  After  the  reading  of  the 
Scriptures,  the  president  (S  ■b-^oso-tw;,)  in- 
structs the  people  in  a  discourse,  and  in- 
cites them  to  the  imitation  of  these  good 
examples."  Among  the  Greeks,  where 
the  taste  was  more  rhetorical,  the  sermon 
from  the  very  earliest  times  was  of  a 
mofe  lengthened  kind,  and  formed  a  very 
important  part  of  the  service. || 


*    Aug\istin.  de  Doctrina  Christiana,  lib  ii.  c.  2. 
t  The  D*^^J")1ri  Dragomans, 

t  'P.fi/umturcti  yhaxrviti:  tU  yKonra-at,  ti  h  txk  <'i'*^- 
m^rariv,  »  h  tou{  Troctro/xiKtctii;.  Epiphan.  Expos.  Fid. 
Cathol.  c,  xxi.  Procopius,  who  suirercd  martyr- 
dom under  the  persecution  of  Dioclesion,  united 
in  his  own  person  at  Scythopolis  in  Palestine,  the 
ofiicea  of  a  reader,  an  exorcist,  and  an  interpreter 
(out  of  the  Greek  into  the  Syriac)  Sec  his  Acta 
Martyr. 

^  Apol.  ii.  [Apol,  1.  §77.] 

II  When  Sozomen  in  the  first  half  of  the  fifth 
century  says:  (Hist.  Eccl.  vii,  19,)  that  in  the 


Singing  also  passed  from  the  Jewish 
service  into  that  of  the  Christian  Church, 
St.  Paul  exhorts  the  early  Churches  to 
sing  spiritual  songs.  What  was  used  for 
this  purpose  were  partly  the  Psalms  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  partly  songs  coin- 
posed  ivith  this  very  object,  especially 
songs  of  praise  and  thanks  to  God  and 
Christ;  and  these,  we  know,  Pliny  found 
to  be  customary  among  the  Christians. 
In  the  controversies  with  the  Unitarians, 
about  the  end  of  the  second  century,  and 
the  beginning  of  the  third,  the  hymns,  in 
which  from  early  times  Christ  had  been 
honoured  as  a  God,  were  appealed  to. 
The  power  of  Church  singing  over  the 
heart  was  soon  recognised,  and  hence 
those  who  wished  to  propagate  any  pecu- 
liar opinions,  like  Bardesanes  or  Paul  of 
Samosata,  endeavoured  to  spread  them  by 
means  of  hymns. 

In  compliance  with  the  infirmities  of 
human  nature,  composed  as  it  is  of  sense 
and  spirit,  the  Divine  Founder  of  the 
Church,  beside  his  word,  ordained  two 
outward  signs,  as  symbols  of  the  invisi- 
ble communion,  which  existed  between 
him, — the  Head  of  the  spiritual  body, — 
and  the  faithful,  its  members ;  and  also 
of  the  connection  of  these  memlers,  as 
with  him,  so  also  jvith  one  another.  These 
were  visible  means  to  represent  the  in- 
visible, heavenly  benefits  to  be  bestowed 
on  the  members  of  this  body  through 
him,  and  while  man  received  in  faith  the 
sign  presented  to  his  senses,  the  enjoy- 
ment of  that  heavenly  communion  and 
those  heavenly  advantages  was  to  gladden 
his  inward  heart.  As  nothing  in  all  Chris- 
tianity and  in  the  whole  Christian  life 
stands  isolated,  but  all  forms  one  whole, 
proceeding  from  one  centre,  therefore,  also 
that  which  this  outward  sign  represented 
must  be  something  which  should  con- 
tinue through  the  whole  of  the  inward 
Christian  life,  something  which,  spreading 
itself  forth  from  this  one  moment  over 
the  whole  Christian  life,  should  be  capa- 
ble of  being  especially  excited  again  and 
promoted  in  return,  by  the  influence  of 


Romish  Church  there  was  no  preaching  at  all, 
this  must  not  be  referred  by  any  means  to  the 
first  times ;  but,  if  the  account  be  true,  we  must 
gather  from  it,  that  the  prevalence  of  sensuous 
shows,  and  liturgical  rights,  had  banished  the  ser- 
mon, in  later  days.  But  an  Oriental  might 
easily  be  mislead  by  false  accounts  from  the  West. 
And  the  source  of  this  error  might  perhaps  be, 
that  the  sermon  did  not  occupy  so  prominent  a 
place  in  the  service  in  the  Romish  Church,  as  in 
the  Greek. 


BAPTISM   AND   THE    LORD'S    SUPPER. 


193 


isolated  moments.  Thus,  baptism  was  to 
be  the  sign  of  a  rirst  entrance  into  com- 
munion with  the  Redeemer,  and  with  the 
Church,  the  first  appropriation  of  those 
advantages,  wliich  Christ  has  bestowed 
on  man,  namely,  of  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  and  the  inward  union  of  life,  which 
proceeds  from  it,  as  well  as  of  the  partici- 
pation in  a  sanctifying  Divine  Spirit  of 
life.  And  tlie  Lord's  Supper  was  to  be 
the  sign  of  a  constant  continuance  in  this 
communion,  in  the  appropriation  and  en-  i 
jovment  of  these  advantages  ;  and  thus 
were  represented  the  essentials  of  the  j 
whole  inward  Christian  lile,  in  its  earliest , 
rise  and  its  continued  progress.  The 
whole  peculiar  spirit  of  Christianity  was 
particularly  stamped  upon  the  mode  in 
which  these  external  things  were  admin- 
istered, and  the  mode  of  their  administra- 
tion in  return  exerted  a  powerful  influ- 
ence on  the  whole  nature  of  the  Chris- 
tian worsiiip.  The  connection  of  the  mo- 
ments, represented  by  these  signs,  with 
the  whole  Christian  life,  the  connection 
of  inward  and  Divine  things  with  the  out- 
ward act,  was  present  to  the  lively  Chris- 
tian feelings  of  the  first  Christians  ;  but 
it  was  here  prejudicial  in  a  practical  point 
of  view,  as  we  observed  before  in  regard 
to  the  doctrines  about  the  Church,  that 
men  neglected  to  separate  properly,  and 
distinguish  in  their  ideas,  the  things  that 
came  to  their  feelings  in  close  connection 
with  one  another. 

We  shall  speak  first  of  baptism. 
Originally,  as  it  was  of  great  conse- 
quence that  the  Church  should  extend  it- 
self rapidly,  those  (among  the  Jews)  who 
acknowledged  their  belief  in  Jesus  as  the 
Messiah,  or  (among  the  heathen)  who  ac- 
knowledged their  belief  in  the  one  God 
and  in  Jesus  the  Messiah,  were  immedi- 
ately baptized,  as  appears  from  the  New 
Testament.  It  gradually  came  to  be 
thought  necessary  to  give  those,  who 
wished  to  be  received  into  the  Christian 
Church,  a  more  careful  instruction  by 
way  of  preparation,  and  to  subject  them 
to  a  more  severe  trial.  This  whole  class 
of  persons  were  called  "  auditores,"  xutd- 
Yfiv^f.i^'n,  and  these  names  implied  that 
they  were  persons,  who  were  receiving  a 
preparatory  instruction  in  Christianity, 
and  who  as  yet  were  only  in  a  state  to 
listen  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  when  they 
were  read,  and  to  the  sermons.  The  time 
of  probation  must  have  been  different  ac- 
cording to  the  difi'erent  condition  of  indi- 
viduals ;  but  the  council  of  Elvira  deter- 
mined generally  that  it  should  last  two 
25 


years.  In  Origan  we  find  two  classes  of 
these  catechumens  distinctly  separated 
from  each  other. 

1.  Those  who  were  for  the  first  time 
receiving  private  instruction. 

2.  Those  who  were  admitted  to  the 
congregations,  and  were  under  immediate 
preparation  for  baptism.* 

There  was  no  distinct  Church  officer 
for  the  private  instruction  of  the  catechu- 
mens ;  at  Carthage  it  was  customary  to 
devolve  this  duty,  after  a  previous  proba- 
tion, on  some  person,  who  was  distin- 
guished among  the  Church  readers ;  at 
Alexandria,  where  men  of  education,  even 
learned  men,  and  persons  accustomed  to 
philosophical  thought,  often  presented 
themselves  for  instruction  in  Christianity, 
it  was  necessary  that  the  catechisls  them- 
selves should  be  men  of  a  learned  educa- 
tion, and  such  as  might  be  in  a  condition 
to  remove  the"  objections  and  the  doubts 
of  the  heathen  ;  this  office,  therefore,  was 
there  filled  even  by  learned  laymen,  who 
were  capable  of  it,  and  these  catechists 
formed  the  foundation  afterwards  of  an 
important  theological  school  ."j" 

There  is  found  in  the  New  Testament;|; 
itself  some  trace  of  a  confession  of  faith, 
which  was  made  at  baptism,  and  these 
confessions  were  afterwards  enlarged,  so 
as  to  oppose  Jews,  heathens  and  heretics. 


*  Origen  (c.  Cels.  lib.  iii.  c.  54,)  clearly  dis- 
tinguishes those  wh»  were  at  first  instructed  ntco' 
ISixv,  and  those,  who  after  a  probation  were  first 
admitted  into  the  congregation,  and  had  their  pe- 
culiar place  assigned  them,  Tnyfxx  tsjv  ligr;  tg^c^us- 
vaiv  x.«  ii:!-'iY'fx%'iom  K.-U  ovisro)  to  a-u/j.^'.Kr,v  tc-j  o-yroKi- 
x.iSxqBui  avayjitpcrcev.  One  is  led  to  inquire,  whether 
there  was  also  a  third  class  in  the  time  of  Origen, 
which  his  obscure  expressions  render  doubtful.  I 
formerly  thought  that  this  was  the  case ;  but,  on  a 
second  investigation,  I  find  my  opinion  to  have  been 
unfounded.  I  thought  that  the  ujua^TuvovTEc  among 
the  baptized  persons,  might  be  there  mentioned  in 
the  character  of  Pcenitentes  and  distinguished  from 
those  before  brought  forward.     The  words,  ci-j.  J' 


f.a-riv  axiTTUv  a.yuryii, 


/hich 


jr  a  little  after,  appear 


rather  to  refer  to  what  goes  before.  The  tc-ju  indi- 
cates no  distinction,  and  is  not  to  be  translated: 
"  The  conduct  also  which  they  pursue  with  regard 
to  the  vicious  members  of  the  Church :"  but  it  re- 
fers to  the  following  xw,  and  is  to  be  translated 
thus,  "And  the  conduct  which  they  pursue,  as 
well  with  regard  to  the  vicious  in  general,  as  with 
regard  to  the  cxoxits-T^vovTE;  in  particular,"  &c. 

-j-  We  shall  have  more  to  say  on  this  subject, 
when  we  treat  of  the  school  of  Alexandria. 

\  See  1  Pet.  iii.  21.  1  Tim  vi.  12.  The  latter 
passage  is  not  so  decidedly  applicable,  because  it 
may  relate  to  a  confession  made  by  Timothy  from 
the  fulness  of  his  heart  on  a  particular  occa-sion, 
when  he  was  chosen  and  consecrated  as  a  mis- 
sionary to  the  heathen. 


194 


SYiMBOL    OF    FAITH,  Yvi^^oXov 


These  confessions  of  faith  were  supposed 
to  include  the  essentials  of  Christianity, 
in  which  all  Churches  agreed.  Men 
were  persuaded,  that  the  doctrine,  ex- 
pressed in  these  confessions  of  faith,  de- 
scended from  the  tradition  of  the  apostles, 
that  it  was  the  doctrine,  which  they  had 
preached  both  "  viva  voce,"  and  by  their 
writings,  but  no  one  imagined,  that  the 
apostles  had  composed  any  such  confes- 
sion in  so  many  words.  In  this  sense  it 
was  called  the  xn^vyjxa  i.iroa-rahty.ov.,  or  the 

wx^xSoaK;  ^TToc-ToXmi) ;  and  the  misunder- 
standing of  this  name  afterwards*  pro- 
duced the  fiction,  that  the  apostles  them- 
selves had  literally  composed  such  a  con- 
fession. This  confession  of  faith  was 
then  pre-eminently  named  symholum.  The 
inquiry  suggests  itself  whether,  when 
men  made  use  of  the  word  "  symbolum" 
in  this  case,  they  originally  intended  to 
use  it  in  its  general  acceptation  of  "  sign," 
with  the  notion  that  the  words  of  this 
confession  were  the  characteristic,  repre- 
sentative sign  of  the  Christian  faith,  or 
whether  they  alluded  to  its  more  restricted 
sense,  in  reference  to  the  a-vn^oXo*  ar^x- 
rnoTty.ov  or  "  tessera  mililaris,"  the  watch- 
word of  the  Christian  soldier  communi- 
cated to  each  man  at  his  first  entrance 
into  the  service  of  Christ  (the  militia 
Christi.)  The  first  is  the  most  probable, 
as  far  as  we  are  able  to  trace  the  history 
of  the  phrase,  because,'.when  it  is  first  ap- 
plied to  baptism,  it  is  applied  in  its  gen- 
eral sense.| 

The  word  a-vfA^oMv,  "  symbolum," 
which  has  so  many  meanings,  might  in- 
troduce many  different  religious  allusions  ; 
the  predominant  one  soon  became  tliat, 
which  belonged  to  the  favourite  compari- 
son of  the  first  Christians  between  their 
calling  and  a  '  militia ;'  in  the  Alexan- 
drian Church,    on    the    contrary,  where 


•  Rufia.  Exposit.  Symbol.  Apostol. 

•j-  Thus  Tcrtullian,  dc  Pocnitciitia,  c.  vi.,  gays, 
that  baptism,  which  by  its  own  nature  should  be  a 
"symbolum  vitfc,"  became  a  "symbolum  mortis" 
to  those  who  received  it  without  the  proper  dispo- 
sitions. Also  "symbolum"  is  used  by  him  (Con- 
tra. Marcion.  lib.  v.  c.  1,)  for  a  si<4n  or  token  gen- 
erally. This  is  done  also  in  the  letter  of  Firmili- 
anus  of  CfBsarea,  where  the  "symbolum  trinitatis" 
is  expressly  distinguished  from  the  confession  of 
faith  used  as  denoting  the  distinguishing  form  of 
baptism.  (Baptismus)  "cui  nee  symbolum  trini- 1 
tatis  nee  interrogatio  Icgitima  et  ecclesiastica  de-  | 
fuit."  And  besides,  Cyprian,  Ep.  7G,  ad  Magnum,  j 
says,  "  eoJem  symlwlo  baptizare,"  to  baptise  with  ' 
the  same  sign.  Perhaps  th' 
denoted  the  "formula"  of  baptism,  and  was  after 
wards  transferred  to  the  confession  of  faith. 


men  were  more  ready  to  hunt  after  analo- 
gies with  the  heathen  mysteries,  which 
they  did  sometimes  in  a  manner  by  no 
means  suited  to  the  simplicity  of  the 
Gospel,  they  rather  caught  at  an  illu- 
sion to  the  signal-word*  of  the  initiated. 
Others  thought  of  another  meaning  of  the- 
word  "  symbolum,"  namely,  a  commer- 
cial partnership,!  ^'^  that  they  imagined  it 
to  be  the  covenant-token  of  a  spiritual 
community.  The  fable  about  an  apos- 
tolic confession  of  faith  afterwards  paved 
the  way  for  a  notion,  that  the  confession 
had  been  formed  by  contributions  from 
each  of  the  apostles,  and  then  they  used 
the  word  {rv/^^o^oc  or  avfjt.Bo\D  in  a  dif- 
ferent sense,  namely,  that  of  a  contribu- 
tion, to  indicate  a  confession,  which  was 
composed  from  the  contributions  of  the 
several  apostles. 

This  confession  of  faith  was  imparted 
to  the  catechumens  as  containing  the  es- 
sentials of  Christianity  :  many  who  em- 
braced the  faith  after  much  inquiry,  and 
the  comparison  of  different  religious  writ- 
ings, as  well  as  from  their  own  study  of 
the  Bible,  of  course,  needed  it  not  as  a 
means  of  learning  the  first  principles  of 
Christianity.  The  only  service  it  could 
be  of  to  them  was,  to  create  in  them  a 
persuasion,  that  the  Church,  which  they 
were  about  to  join,  coincided  in  its  doc- 
trines with  the  Holy  Scriptures,  from 
which  they  had  drawn  their  faith.  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria  accordingly  desires 
the  heathen  to  persuade  themselves,  by 
inquiries  into  the  Holy  Scriptures,  what 
the  true  Christian  religion  is,  and  where 
it  is  to  be  found,  saying  that  it  only  needs 
the  use  of  their  faculties,  to  distinguish 
the  appearance  from  the  reality,  the  real 
true  doctrine  that  is  deduced  from  the 
Holy  Scripture  from  that  which  has 
merely  a  semblance  of  being  so.J 

There  were,  nevertheless,  others,  who 
first  learned  what  Christianity  is  from  the 
confession  of  faith  and  the  instruction 
which  accompanied  it,  and  who  did  not 


*  Stromal.  V.  p.  585.  The •xiUTMi- is  compared 
with  the  K<fl<^3-(aof  the  heathen  mysteries. 

I  Augustin.  Sermon,  212.  "Symbolum  inter 
se  facient  mercatores,  quo  eorum  societas  pacto 
fidci  teneatur  et  vestra  societas  est  commerciuni 
spiritualium." 

t  Stromal,  vli.  p.  754,  755  Ai  a'jraiy  rcey  ypt^av 

bititpiu.  (by  perceptive  intuition)*  km  tu  Kupt'jeTiru 
>.'jyiT f/.ui  (deepest  thought)  Toc<X)ifli;u7roTH/?^i'i/-<6vi/W. 
word  at  first  only  |  [Pott.  88S.Sylb.  320.] 

Anschauuno. 


BELIEF    LEARNED    BY    HEART. 


arrive  till  afterwards  at  a  state  in  which 
they  could  compare  what  they  had  re- 
ceived from  the  teaching  of  men  with  the 
Holy  Scriptures*  Such  were  the  persons 
of  whom  Ileracleon,  the  Gnostic,  said,* 
"  They  are  first  induced  to  believe  on  the 
Saviour,  being  brought  to  this  faith  by 
men,  but  when  thev  come  themselves  to 
his  words,  they  believe  no  longer  on  the 
mere  testimony  of  men,  but  for  the  truth's 
sake."  Clement  of  Alexandridf  -^ays  also, 
"•The  first  saving  change  from  heathenism 
is  failk^  and  faith  is  a  sliort  confession 
(so  to  speak)  of  the  most  urgent  truths 
of  religion.  On  this  foundation  know- 
ledge is  built,  which  is  a  settled  convic- 
tion of  the  truths  received  through  faith, 
by  demonstrations  taken  from  Scripture." 
Others,  who  were  entirely  uneducated 
and  unable  to  read,  could  only  learn  from 
the  mouths  of  others,  and  could  never 
come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures 
themselves ;  and  yet  the  Divine  truth 
which  they  received  from  the  mouths  of 
others,  preserved  themselves  independ- 
ently in  their  hearts,  as   a  Divine  power. 

Where  the  word  once  found  entrance, 
another,  and  not  human  teacher,  never 
failed  to  accompany  it;  and  that  was  the 
Holy  Ghost.  "  Many  of  us,"  says  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria,  "  have  received  the 
Divine  doctrine  by  faith,  without  the  use 
of  writings,  through  the  power  of  God." 

The  few  words  of  this  confession  of 
faith  needed  not,  of  course,  to  be  com- 
municated in  icrtting;  they  were  to  pass 
into  the  heart  of  the  catechumen,  to  go 
from  living  lips  into  his  life,  and  to  be  de- 
clared by  him  as  his  own  firm  persuasion. 
But  when  men  were  inclined  to  introduce 
a  higher  notion  into  this  custom  of  oral 
instruction  in  the  faith,  the  origin  of  which 
is  so  simply  explained,  the  idea  was  near 
at  hand,  that  the  Christian  doctrine  could 
not  enter  into  a  man  from  without,  by 
means  of  letters,  but  that  it  must  be  writ- 
ten down  in  the  heart,  and  there  grow  like 
some  living  thing.  (Jer.  xxxi.  33. )J  In 
after  times,  a  love  of  mystery,  quite 
foreign  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel, 
which  first  arose  in  the  Alexandrian 
Ctiurch,  from  its  connection  wilh  the 
heathen  mysteries,  and  from  the  influence 


*   Origen,  t.  xiii.  in  Johann.  §  52. 

■j-  Clemens  Alex.  Stromal,  i.  p.  319,    o<  it  n-u 

OHeJ  ypl/XfAXTO)/  SvltfAU  TC»  TTf^;    ©S-.U    il%  TriTTWi  TTJ.- 

f^MVifAtt  K'.y.i.     [PoU.  .376.    Sylh.  137.] 

\  So  Augustin.  j)  212.  "Hujus  rei  signifi- 
candae  causa  auiliendo  syinbolum  discitur  nee  in 
tabulis  vel  in  aliqua  materia,  sed  in  cordc  scri- 
bitur." 


195 

of  a  Neo-Platonic  mysticism,  deduced 
the  following  meaning  from  this  custom  : 
"  That  what  is  most  holy  could  not  be 
committed  to  writing,  nor  should  it  be 
produced  before  the  uniniiiated,  and  thus 
become  desecrated  •,"*  and  this  they  be- 
lieved, in  spite  of  the  fact,  that  the  holiest 
traditions  of  Divine  doctrine,  the  Scrip- 
tures, might  yet  come  into  the  hands  of 
every  heathen ;  and  that  the  apologists 
themselves  had  no  scruple  in  bringing 
forward  the  most  sacred  doctrines  of 
Christianity  to  the  heatliens.  When  our 
Saviour  warned  us  not  to  throw  pearls 
before  swine,  this  was  a  recommenda- 
tion not  to  preach  Divine  things  to  men 
who  are  the  slaves  of  their  senses,  at 
improper  times  and  places ;  but  it  was  by 
no  means  an  exhortation  to  withdraw  holy 
things  carefully  from  the  eyes  of  the  pro- 
fane multitude.  The  very  nature  of  holy 
things  is  such,  that  they  need  fear  no  de- 
secration ;  they  remain  what  they  are,  how- 
ever men's  minds  may  be  afleeted  towards 
them;  and  man,  by  mocking  that  which  is 
holy,  can  only  desecrate  that  portion  of 
his  own  nature  which  is  akin  to  holiness. 

This  confession  of  faith  was  made  by 
the  catachumens  at  baptism,  in  answers 
to  separate  questions.t 

The  declaration  of  a  moral  engagement 
was  also  connected  with  the  declaration 
of  faith.  The  view  then  taken  of  bap- 
tism was  this :  it  #as  supposed  that  the 
person  to  be  baptized  was  departing  out 
of  the  kingdom  of  evil,  of  darkness,  and 
of  Satan,  whom   he  had  hitherto   served 


*  The  same  mystical  fancies  and  ceremonies, 
to  which  men  attributed  more  than  was  orinrinally 
intended  by  them,  afterwards  gave  room  for  the 
invention  of  a  sort  of  indefinite  and  unhistorical 
notion  of  a  "disciplina  arcani,"  from  which,  just 
because  it  was  indefinite  and  groundless,  men 
could  create  exactly  whatever  they  pleased. 

■\  According  to  the  most  natural  interpretation 
of  1  Peter  iii.  21,  it  contains  an  allusion  to  the 
questions  proposed  at  baptism.  'ETSga>T««i  is  put 
metonymice,  for  the  pledge  that  followed  the 
questions.  TertuUian,  de  Corona  Milit.  c.  iii. 
'•  Ami)lius  aliquid  re>'po)idcntes,i\ua.m  Dominus  in 
Evangclio  determinavit."  And  again,  TertuUian, 
do  Resurrectione,  c.  xlviji.,  says  of  baptism. 
«  .\nima  rerponsione  sancitur."  The  council  of 
eighty-seven  bishops,  in  the  time  of  Cyprian, 
says  of  these  questions,  "  Sacramentum  inlerro- 
gare."  (•'  Sacramentum"  is  here  synonymous 
with  "doctrina  sacra.'")  In  a  letter  of  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria,  which  is  found  in  Eusebius,  (vii. 
9,)  the  following  expression  occurs:  'ET5^»r/)«if 
Kt!  C7r.x.^i7it:  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixxvi.  ad  Magnum, 
[Ep.  Ixix.  cd.  Ox.]  quotes  one  of  these  questions: 
"  (Jredis  remissionern  pcccatorum  et  vitam  »ter- 
nam  persanctam  ecclesiatn!" 


196 


BAPTISM    OF   JOHN   AND    CHRIST. 


as  a  heathen,  when  devoted  to  his  lusts, 
and  that  he  was  now  entering  into  the 
kingdom  of  God.  He  was,  therefore, 
solemnly  to  renounce  all  communion 
with  the  kingdom  in  which  he  had  for- 
merly served.  He  gave  his  hand  to  the 
bishop,  and  pledged  himself*  to  renounce 
the  devil  and  all  his  pomps)  among  which, 
at  that  time,  the  heathen  plays  and  shows 
were  particularly  intended)  and  his  angels; 
and  this  latter  declaration  was  probably 
owing  to  the  idea,  that  the  heathen  gods 
were  evil  spirits,  which  had  seduced 
them.f  This  pledge  was  considered,  ac- 
cording to  the  favourite  comparison  of 
these  days,  as  the  Christian  soldier's  oath, 
the  "  sacramentum  militiai  Christiana?," 
by  which  the  Christian  bound  himself  to 
live  and  to  fight  as  the  "miles  Dei  et 
Chnsti." 

This  form  of  renunciation,  which  we 
find  in  the  second  century,  must  be  care- 
fully distinguished  from  exorcism^  which 
could  not  have  proceeded  so  early  from 
tlie  ideas  of  Christian  antiquity.  The 
notion  of  a  deliverance  from  the  power 
of  the  evil  spirit,  in  a  religious  and  moral 
point  of  view,  of  a  departure  from  out  of 
the  kingdom  of  wickedness,  and  of  a  par- 
ticipation, through  the  new  birth,  in  a 
Divine  life,  which  should  be  victorious 
over  the  evil  principle;  this  notion,  we 
acknowledge,  suits  the  original  and  essen-- 
tially  Christian  ideas  d<  the  earliest  times; 
but  then,  the  whole  act  of  baptism  was  to 
be  a  sensible  representation  of  this  idea, 
and  therefore,  there  was  no  necessity  to 
bring  forward  any  thing  individual  and 
detached,  to  denote  and  effect  that,  which 
was  denoted  and  represented  as  effective 
for  the  believer  by  the  whole  act  of  bap- 
tism. The  case  is  slightly  different  with 
regard  to  the  formula  of  renunciation, 
because  this  referred,  like  the  confession 
of  faith,  to  that  which  man  must  do  for 
his  (mm  part,  in  order  to  become  a  par- 
taker in  the  blessings  of  baptism.  As 
faith  and  practice  are  so  closely  con- 
nected in  Christianity,  this  renunciation 
followed  immediately  after  the  confession 
of  faith.  We  find,  therefore,  in  the  second 
century,  still  no  trace  of  any  formula  for 
banishing  the  evil  spirit.  But  wlien  the 
taste  for  magic,  and  the  confusion  between 
outward   and  inward,  became  more  and 

*  According  to  Tertullian,  de  C  M.  c.  iii.,  this 
happened  twice — first,  before  he  was  fit  for  bap- 
tism, at  his  first  introduction  into  the  congrega- 
tions and  then  again  at  his  baptism. 

\  'A^TOKTtrwflaU  <TU>  StX^OKO)  KM  TJ)  'PrCfATTtt  KM   TOK 


more  predominant,  as  men  imagined  an 
actual  possession  of  the  unbelievers  by 
the  evil  spirit,  and  invented  a  proper  ma- 
gical formula  for  banishing  him,  and  as 
men  were  always  glad  to  increase  the 
outward  ceremonial  in  religious  aflairs, 
so  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  formula  of 
exorcism,  which  was  used  in  the  case  of 
the  energumens  or  possessed,  was  in- 
troduced into  the  baptism  of  all  hea- 
thens. Perhaps  also  another  circumstance 
was  closely  connected  with  this  change, 
namely,  that  in  general  a  mere  lifeless 
mechanical  act,  attached  to  a  particular 
office  in  the  Church,  had  taken  the  place 
of  the  real  exorcising,  which  in  earlier 
times  had  been  a  free  grace  or  charisma. 
In  the  apostolic  constitutions  we  find  nei- 
ther the  one  nor  the  other.  The  first 
unequivocal  trace  of  exorcism  in  baptism, 
is  found  in  the  acts  of  the  council  of 
Carthage,  composed  of  eighty-seven  or 
eighty-five  bishops,  A.  D.  256.* 

As  ftr  as  regards  the  outward  form  of 
baptism,  this,  as  well  as  so  much  of  Chris- 
tianity beside,  is  deduced  from  Judaism, 
whether  it  be  an  imitation  of  the  baptism 
of  proselytes,  since  this  already  existed 
among  the  Jews,  or  whether  it  be  taken 
from  their  common  habit  of  outward 
purification.  John  the  Baptist,  in  op])o- 
sition  to  the  ''  opus  operatum"  of  the 
Jewish  lustrations,  brought  forward  his 
baptism,  as  a  sign  of  preparation  for  the 
approaching  appearance  of  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom, — a  sign  of  repentance, 
by  which  man  w^s  to  make  himself  ca- 
pable of  reception  into  the  kingdom  of 
God.  Christ  also  retained  this  existing 
form  of  baptism,  as  a  symbol  of  conse- 
cration for  the  approaching  kingdom  of 
the  Messiah,  and  he  ennobled  it  by  the 
new  and  higher  spirit,  which  he  imparted 
to  it,  to  which  John  the  Baptist  had 
already  pointed.  Instead  of  a  baptism 
into  the  hope  of  a  Messiah,  who  was 
about  to  appear  among  the  people  and 


*  The  North  African  bishop,  Csecilius  of  Bilta, 
here  .supposes,  in  delivering  his  sentence,  that 
exorcism  belongs  essentially  to  the  integrity  of 
baptism.  The  sentence  of  the  flmatical  Vincen- 
tius,  bishop  of  Thibari,  was,  that  the  "manuuin 
impositio  in  cxorcismo,"  must  precede  the  baptism 
of  a  heretic.  But  from  the  Ixxvith  [Ixix.ed.  Ox.] 
epistle  of  Cyprian,  addressed  to  Magnus,  we  can- 
not prove  the  existence  of  exorcism  in  baptism 
generally,  because  there  the  subject  of  discussion 
is  exorcism  of  the  energumens,  and  Cyprian  is 
inclined  to  show  that  baptism  is  far  more  powerful 
than  exorcism.  "  Spiritus  nequam  ultra  remanere 
non  possunt  in  hominis  corpore,  in  quo  baptizato 
et  sanctijicato  incipit  Spiritus  sanctus  habitare. 


ORIGINAL    FORM    OP    BAPTISM. 


19': 


reveal  himself  to  them,  men  were  now  to 
be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Messiah, 
who  had  already  appeared,  and  who  was 
working  by  Divine  power;  instead  of  a 
negative  kind  of  baptism  to  repentance, 
by  wa}^  of  preparation,  the  baptism  of 
the  Spirit  was  to  make  its  appearance  as 
the  symbol  of  an  inward  renovation  and 
elevation,  by  means  of  that  communica- 
tion of  Divine  life,  which  was  to  be  shed 
upon  this  baptism  from  tlie  Messiah,  as 
the  Redeemer  of  man  estranged  from 
God,  and  the  founder  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  among  mankind,  whom  he  had 
redeemed.  As  long  as  the  fvdness  of  the 
Divine  nature  was  hidden  under  the  guise 
of  an  earthly  and  human  existence,  this 
Divine  efficacy  of  the  Messiah  did  not 
reveal  itself,  the  Divine  life  was  then  his 
01C71  exclusive  possession  among  men.  As 
He  himself  declared,  the  seed  must  first 
fall  into  the  earth  and  die  in  order  to 
bring  forth  much  fruit.  It  was  only  after 
He  should  have  ascended  into  heaven, 
that  the  glorified  Son  of  man  would  be 
able  to  bestow  that  baptism  of  the  Spirit 
in  its  Divine  and  invisible  efiicacy.  It 
was  then  that  the  true  sense  of  the  Chris- 
tian baj)tism  was  fully  expanded. 

We  certainly  cannot  prove,  that  when 
Christ  commanded  his  disciples  to  bap- 
tise in  the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  He  intended  to  esta- 
blish a  particular  formula  of  baptism. 
The  purpose  of  expressing  the  true  cha- 
racter of  a  consecration  to  the  kingdom 
of  God,  and  of  declaring  in  a  few  words 
the  nature  of  his  Divine  efficacy  among  the 
human  race,  and  the  nature  of  his  new  reli- 
gion, was  decidedly  of  more  importance 
with  Him,  than  that  of  giving  a  certain  form 
of  words,  which  should  last  for  all  ages. 
He  wished  to  show  the  dependence  of  the 
Avhole  life  on  the  one  God,  who  had  re- 
vealed Himself  through  his  Son  as  the 
Father  of  fallen  man,  and  who  imparls  his 
Spirit  to  sanctify  man,  whom  his  Son  has 


prove    from  the  use  of  the  expressions 

flaTTTto-^o?  iJ;  ovo/i**  Tov  Xg«7Tou,  tii  X^icrrov, 
haptism  into  ike  name  of  Christy  into 
Christ.,  tliat  in  the  apostolic  age  this 
shorter  formula  was  commonly  used  in- 
stead of  the  fuller  one.  For  in  the  pas- 
sages, where  this  description  of  baptism 
is  met  with,  no  verbal  formula  of  baptism 
is  meant  to  be  given  at  all,  but  only  the 
characteristic  aim  of  baptism  is  meant  to 
be  brought  forward,  the  expression  of  a 
belief  in  Jesus,  as  the  Messiah,  and  an 
engagement  to  live  in  faith  and  obedience 
to  Him.  It  may  be  said,  perhaps,  that 
the  revival  of  this  simple  formula  of  bap- 
tism by  Marcion,  is  a  proof  that  it  was 
the  original,  and  that  the  shorter  one  was 
of  later  date,  for  Marcion  (see  below, 
in  the  history  of  sects,)  was  desirous  in 
respect  to  every  thing  to  separate  that 
which  was  original  and  apostolic  from  the 
additions  of  the  Church  in  later  times. 
But  this  argument  is  not  to  be  depended 
on,  for  Marcion  may  have  drawn  conclu- 
sions from  the  common  expressions  of  St. 
Paul  on  baptism,  without  any  other  his- 
torical grounds,  and  have  been  induced, 
solely  from  these  conclusions,  to  accuse 
the  Church  in  this  case,  as  well  as  in 
other  things,  of  an  adulteration  of  the 
original  simplicity  of  the  Gospel ;  and 
there  may  be  reasons,  why  his  own  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  led  him  to  favour  the 
more  simple  formula.  We  should  have 
better  reason  to  conclude,  from  the  re- 
spect which  men  showed  in  the  Romish 
Cliurch  for  this  formula  in  the  contro- 
versies which  we  are  shortly  about  to 
mention,  that  much  might  be  said  for  its 
antiquity.  At  all  events,  the  fuller  for- 
mula, when  properly  understood,  was 
nothing  more  than  the  development  of 
that  which  was  implicitly  contained  in 
the  shorter  form.  Justin  Martyr  quotes 
the  former  as  that  which  was  generally 
prevalent  in  his  day. 

Baptism  was  originally  administered  by 


redeemed;  as  well  as  to  point  to  the  true  [  immersion,  and  many  of  the  comparisons 
worship  of  God,  as  He  had  revealed  Him-  of  St.  Paul  allude  to  this  form  of  its  ad- 
self  through  his  Son,  in  a  heart  sanctified  I  ministration  :  the  immersion  is  a  symbol 
by  the  Divine  life,  which  is  shed  forth  of  death,  of  being  buried  with  Christ,  the 
from  Him.  The  proper  nature  of  the ;  coming  forth  from  the  water  is  a  symbol 
peculiar  theism  of  Christianity  (God  in  i  of  a  resurrection  with  Christ,  and  both 
Christ  and  through  Christ)  is  briefly  set  j  taken  together  represent  the  second  birth. 


forth  in  these  words.  On  that  very  ac- 
count, therefore,  these  words  were  also 
most  eminently  calculated  to  serve  for  a 
formula    of    baptism,    inasmuch    as    the 


the  death  of  the  old  man  and  a  resurrec- 
tion to  a  new  life.  An  exception  was 
made  only  in  the  case  of  sick  persons, 
which  was  necessary,  and   they  received 


essential  character  and  relations  of  the  1  baptism  by  sprinkling.  Many  supersti- 
Christian  consecration  were  so  clearly  set  tious  persons  imagined,  from  attaching 
forth    in    them.      We    cannot,   however,  I  too  much  importance  to   externals,   that 

r2 


198 


CLINICI. INFANT    BAPTISM ITS    ORIGIN. 


baptism  by  sprinkling  was  not  valid,  and 
therefore  they  distinguished  those  who 
were  so  baptized  from  other  Christians, 
by  the  name  of  '•' clinici."*  Cyprian 
expresses  liimself  strongly  against  this 
fancy  :t  "•  The  breast  of  the  believer  is 
washed  in  one  way,  and  the  soul  of  man 
is  purified  by  the  merit  of  faith  in  another. 
la  the  sactaments  of  salvation,  when  ne- 
cessity compels  and  God  gives  permission, 
the  Divine  service,  though  abridged,  con- 
fers its  whole  efficacy  on  the  believer.;}; 

Or  if  any  one  supposes    that 

they  have  obtained  nothing  because  they 
have  only  been  sprinkled  with  the  water 
of  salvation,  let  them  not  be  deceived  so 
far  as  to  be  baptized  again,  if  they  recover 
their  health.  But  if  those,  Avho  have 
already  been  sanctified  by  the  baptism  of 
the  Cliurch,  are  not  to  be  baptized  again, 
why  should  their  faith  be  troubled,  and 
the  grace  of  God  made  a  reproach  to 
them.  Have  they,  then,  obtained  the 
grace  of  God,  but  obtained  it  with  a 
shorter  and  a  deficient  measure  of  the  gift 
of  God  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that 
they  may  be  reckoned  as  Christians,  but 
not  placed  on  the  same  footing  with  the 
rest.'  Nay,  then,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not 
given  by  measure,  but  is  shed  on  the 
believer  in  its  whole  fulness.  For  if  the 
day  dawns  on  all  alike,  and  the  sun  sheds 
an  equal  liglit  on  all,  how  much  more 
does  Christ,  the  true  sun  and  the  true  day, 
impart  to  all  in  his  Church  the  light  of 
eternal  life  with  impartial  equality." 

As  faith  and  baptism  are  constantly  so 
closely  connected  together  in  the  New 
Testament,  an  opinion  was  likely  to  arise, 
tliat  where  there  could  be  no  taith,  there 
could  also  be  no  baptism.  It  is  certain 
that  Christ  did  not  ordain  infant  baptism  ] 
he  left,  indeed,  much,  which  was  not 
needful  for  salvation,  to  the  free  develop- 
ment of  the  Christian  spirit,  without  here 
appointing  binding  laws.  We  cannot 
prove  tliat  the  apostles  ordained  infant 
baptism;  from  those  places  where  the 
l)aptism  of  a  whole  family  is  mentioned, 
as  in  Acts  xvi.  33.  1  Cor.  i.  l(i,  we  can 
dravv  no  such  conclusion,  because  the  in- 
quiry is  still  to  be  made,  whether  there 
were  any  children  in  these  families  of 
such  an  age,  that  they  were  not  capable 
of  any  intelligent  reception  of  Christianity, 
for  this  is  the  only  point  on  which  the 

•  See  page  197. 

■f-  Ep.  ixxri.  ad  Mae;n.  [Ep.  Ixix.  ed.  Ox.] 
i  "  Totuin   crcdcntibus  conferunt  divina  com- 
pendia."    This   passage  has  been  slightly  para- 
phraued  in  the  translation  to  render  it  mtellie^ible. 


case  turns.     From   the  deficiency  of  his- 
torical documents  of  the  lirst  half  of  this 
period,  we  must  also  avow  that  the  want 
of  any  positive    testimony  to  the  custom 
cannot  be  brought  as  an  arg-ument  against 
its    antiquity.     The  first  passage   which 
appears  expressly  to  point  to  this  matter, 
is  found  in  lrena3us.     We  shall  consider 
the  whole  of  this  remarkable  passage  with 
some    degree    of  accuracy.     Irenasus  .  is 
endeavouring   to    show,  that  Christ  did 
not  stop  the  progress  of  the  development 
of  human  nature,  which  was  to  be  sancti- 
fied by  him,  but  that  he  sanctified  it,  in 
all  its  successive  stages,  in  conformity  to 
its  essential  qualities  in  each  :  "  He  came 
to  redeem  all  by  himself;  all  I  say,  who 
are   born  again  into  God  through    him, 
infants,  children,  boys,  youths,  and  the 
old.    Therefore,  he  passed  through  every 
age,  and    became   an    infant   to    infants, 
sanctifying   infants,  he    became    a   child 
among  children,  to  sanctify  those  of  this 
age,  giving  them  at  the  same  time  an  ex- 
ample of  piety,  of  justice,  and  obedience, 
and  for  young  men  he  became  a  young 
man,   to  set   them    an    example,  and   to 
sanctify  them  to  the  Lord."*     It  is  here 
of  consequence  to  remark    particularly, 
that  infants  (infantes)  are  expressly  dis- 
tinguished    from    children    (parvuli,)    to 
whom  Christ  can  serve  as  an  example ; 
and  that  these  infants  are  represented  as 
being  only  capable  of  receiving  an  objec- 
tive salvation  from  Christ,  who  appeared 
in  an  age  and  condition  similar  to  theirs. 
j  This   salvation   is    imparted   to  them   iu 
j  consideration  of  their  being  born  again  in 
[  reference    to   God,    through    Christ.     In 
I  Irenaeus  the  new  birth  and  baptism  are 
intimately  connected,  and  it  would  be  dif- 
I  ficult  for  one  to  imagine  any  thing  else 
j  than  baptism  as  meant  by  the  new  birth, 
when  used  in  reference  to  this  age.     In- 
1  fant  baptism  also  here  appears  the  means 
j  by  which  the  principle  imparted  through 
I  Christ    to    human    nature   from  its  very 
j  earliest  development,  might  be  appropri- 
ated to  the    salvation  of   children.     We 
I  find  here  the  essentially  Christian  notion, 
j  from  which  infant  baptism  would  derive 
I  itself  spontaneously,  the  more  Christianity 

I  *  Irenseus,  II.  c.  xxii.  §  4.  "  Omnes  enim  per 
[  semctipsum  venit  salvare  :  omnes,  inquam,  qui 
per  eum  renascimtur  in  Deum,  infantes  et  par- 
vulos  et  pueros  ct  juvenes  et  seniores.  Ideo  per 
omnem  venit  fctatem,  et  infantibus  itifans  factus, 
sanctificans  infantes,  in  parvulis  parvulus,  sanctifi- 
cans  banc  ipsam  habentes  (Etatem,  simul  et  exem- 
plum  illis  pietatis  efi'ectus,  et  justitite  et  subjcc- 
tionis,  in  juvenibus  juveni.s  exemplum  juvenibus 
liens  et  sanctificans  Domino." 


TERTULLIAN  AGAINST    INFANT    BAPTISM. 


199 


penetrated  into  domestic  life ;  namely, 
that  Christ,  by  means  of  that  Divine  life, 
which  He  commnnicated  to  human  nature, 
and  revealed  in  it,  has  sanctified  that 
nature  from  the  very  first  seed  of  its  de- 
velopment. If  every  thing  was  as  it 
ought  to  be,  the  child  born  in  a  Christian 
family  would  have  this  advantage,  that  he 
did  not  first  come  to  Christianity  from 
heathenism,  or  from  a  natural  life  of  sin, 
but  that  he  would  grow  up,  from  the  first 
dawning  of  conscience,  under  the  imper- 
ceptible and  preventing*  influence  of  a 
sanctifying  and  ennobling  Christianity ; 
with  the  very  first  seeds  of  consciousness 
in  the  natural  life,  a  Divine  principle,  en- 
nobling nature,  would  be  near  him,  by 
which  the  diviner  portion  of  his  nature 
might  be  attracted  and  strengthened, 
before  its  ungodliness  could  come  into 
full  activity ;  and  this  latter  evil  spirit 
would  here  find  itself  overmatched  by  its 
counterpoise.  In  such  a  life  the  new  I 
birth  would  form  no  division,  that  began 
at  any  one  particular  moment,  but  it 
would  begin  imperceptibly,  and  so  con- 
tinue its  progress  through  the  whole  life. 
Therefore,  the  visible  token  of  the  new 
birtli,  that  is,  baptism,  was  to  be  given 
to  the  child  from  its  earliest  hours,  and 
he  was  to  be  consecrated  to  his  Saviour 
from  the  very  first. 

From  this  idea,  founded  on  the  internal 
feelings  of  Christianity,  which  obtained 
an  influence  over  men's  dispositions,  the 
custom  of  infant  baptism  proceeded.  Oh  ! 
that  men  had  not  so  soon  confused  the 
IJivine  thing  and  the  sign  which  repre- 
sented it,  and  had  not  wished  to  bind  the 
work  of  the  Spirit  on  the  outward  sign  ! 

But  immediately  after  IreucEUS,!  in  the 
latter  years  of  the  second  century,  Tertul- 
lian  appeared  as  a  zealous  opponent  of 
infant  baptism,  a  proof  that  it  was  not 
then  usually  considered  as  an  apostolical 
ordinance,  for  in  that  case  he  would  hardly 
have  ventured  to  speak  so  strongly  against 
it.     We  see  from  his  arguments  against 

•  [Zavorkommcnden.  I  have  here  used  the 
word  '  preventing'  in  its  old  sense,  as  used  in  our 
collects.— H.  J.  K.] 

-(■  If  any  one  were  inclined  to  prove  the  exist- 
ence of  infant  baptism  from  the  passage  of 
Clemens  Alcxand.  Pa;dag.  iii.  247.  i^  t'/aroc 
i)ia(j-7ra!fj.im-i  ■n-±iiiu\',  which  we  quoted  above,  and 
which  certainly  relates  to  baptism,  we  might  re- 
mark that  this  is  hardly  to  be  considered  any  proof; 
for  as  the  notion  of  the  Sa;?  ^rWa^o^c  was  present 
to  the  imagination  of  Clement,  he  might  call  all 
Christians  TrcttSta..  But  he  is  undoubtedly  here 
speaking  of  conversion  and  regeneration,  in  refer- 
ence to  all  mankind. 


infant  baptism,  that  its  defenders  had 
already  appealed  to  Malt.  xix.  14,  which 
it  would  be  very  obvious  to  any  one  to 
quote:  "The  Lord  did  not  reject  little 
children,  they  were  to  be  brought  to  Him, 
that  He  might  bless  them."  Tertullian 
advises  generally,  that  men  should  delay 
baptism,  in  consideration  of  the  great  im- 
portance of  this  rite  and  the  preparation 
necessary  for  it  on  the  part  of  the  recipient, 
rather  than  hasten  unprepared  to  it,  and 
on  this  he  fakes  occasion  to  declare  him- 
self particularly  against  haste  in  the  bap- 
tism of  children.*  In  regard  to  the  saying 
of  Christ  which  was  quoted  against  him, 
he  answers,  "  Let  them  come,  while  they 
are  growing  up;  let  them  come,  while" 
they  are  learning,  while  they  are  being 
taught  whither  it  is  they  come ;  let  them 
become  Christians,  after  they  have  had  an 
opportunity  of  knowing  Christ.  Why 
does  the  age  of  innocence  hasten  to  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  ?  Men  will  act  more 
prudently  in  secular  affairs,  if  Divine 
things  are  entrusted  to  those,  to  whom 
worldly  substance  would  not  be  entrusted. 
Let  them  first  learn  to  seek  salvation,  that 
you  may  appear  to  give  to  one  who  asks 
it."  Tertullian  desires  that  children  may 
be  brought  to  Christ,  while  they  are  being 
instructed  in  Christianity  ;  but  he  does  not 
wish  them  to  receive  baptism  until  they 
have  been  sufficiently  instructed  in  Chris- 
tianity, and  from  their  own  conviction  and 
free  choice,  with  earnest  longings  of  the 
heart,  desire  baptism  themselves.  One 
may,  perhaps,  say  :  he  is  only  speaking  of 
what  ought  to  be  done  in  ordinary  cases 
according  to  rule;  but  if  any  sudden  danger 
of  death  threatened,  even  on  his  own 
principles,  baptism  ought  to  take  place. 
But  then,  had  he  thought  this  so  necessary, 
he  would  hardly  have  omitted  to  state  it 
expressly.  It  appears,  then,  from  the 
grounds  which  he  lays  down,  that  he 
could  not  imagine  any  efficacy  of  baptism 
widiout  the  conscious  participation  of  the 
person  baptized,  and  his  own  individual 
faith ;  and  he  also  saw  no  danger  to  the 
innocence  of  infancy  (although,  according 
to  his  own  system,  this  is  by  no  means  a 
logical  inference.) 

But  whilst,  on  the  one  hand,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  corruption  and  guilt,  inherited 
by  human  nature,  as  the  consequence  of 
the  first  transgression,  was  reduced  into  a 
more  systematic  and  distinct  form,  which 
was  particularly  the  case    in  the  North 

•  De  Baptismo,  c.  xviii.  "  Cunctatio  baptism! 
\  utilior  est,  prsecipue  circa  parvulos." 


200 


INFANT   BAPTISM    RECOGNISED,   A.  D.  250. 


African  Church  (see  below,  in  the  history  1 
of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity ;)  on  the 
other  hand,  from  want  of  a  proper  dis- 
tinction between  the  external  and  internal 
things  of  baptism  (the  baptism  of  water, 
and  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,)  the  idea 
was  forever  gaining  ground,  and  becoming 
more  firmly  fixed,  that  without  outward 
baptism  no  one  could  be  freed  from  that 
inherited  guilt,  saved  from  the  eternal 
punishment  which  threatened  him,  or 
brought  to  eternal  happiness ;  and  while 
the  idea  of  the  magical  effects  of  the  sacra- 
ment was  constantly  obtaining  more  and 
more  sway,  the  theory  of  the  unconditional 
necessity  of  infant  baptism  developed  itself 
'from  that  idea.  This  was  generally  re- 
ceived in  the  North  African  Church,  as 
early  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 
But  there  was  still  a  question  whether  the 
child  should  be  baptized  immediately  after 
his  birth,  or  eight  days  after,  as  in  the 
case  of  circumcision  .?  The  latter  was  the 
opinion  of  Bishop  Fidus,  who  proposed 
the  inquiry  to  a  council  at  Carthage. 
Cyprian  answered  him,  A.  D.  252,  in  the 
name  of  sixty-six  bishops.*  His  answer 
shows  us  how  full  he  was  of  that  great 
Christian  idea,  which  we  have  mentioned 
above,  from  which  the  custom  of  infant 
baptism  proceeded — and  in  this  respect  he 
says  much  that  bears  the  genuine  stamp 
of  Christianity — but  we  also  observe  at 
the  same  time  how  his  confusion  between 
outward  and  inward, — his  materialism — 
prevented  him  from  comprehending  it  with 
sufficient  freedom  and  clearness,  and  led 
him  to  mingle  much  that  was  erroneous 
with  the  truth  he  brought  forward.  What 
he  says  against  the  arbitrary  appointment 
of  the  time  advocated  by  Fidus,  is  alto- 
gether just.  Let  us  hear  his  own  words  : 
"  None  of  us  could  agree  to  your  opinion  ; 
but  we  all  determined  that  the  grace  of 
God  is  not  to  be  refused  to  any  human 
being,  as  soon  as  he  is  born.  For  since 
the  Lord  says  in  his  Gospel, '  The  Son  of 
man  is  not  come  to  destroy  the  souls  of 
men,  but  to  save  them,'  (Luke  ix.  56,)  we 
are  to  do  all  in  our  power  that  no  soul 

should  be  destroyed For  as  God 

accepts  not  persons,  so  neither  does  he 
ages ;  since  he  shows  himself  a  father  to 
all  for  the  attainment  of  heavenly  grace 
with  well-poised  equality.  For  witii  re- 
gard to  what  you  say,  that  the  child  is  not 
clean  to  the  touch  in  the  first  days  of  his 
birth,  and  that  any  one  of  us  woidd  shrink 
from  giving  it  a  kiss,  this  ought  to  be  no 


impediment  to  bestowing  heavenly  grace 
upon  it,  since  it  is  written,  'To  the  pure 
all  things  are  pure.'  None,  therefore,  of 
us  ought  to  shrink  from  that  which  God 
has  thought  fit  to  make.  Though  the 
child  be  but  just  born,  yet  there  is  no 
reason  even  then,  that  any  one  should 
shrink  from  kissing  it,  to  bestow  upon  it 
the  grace  of  God,  and  give  it  the  salutation 
of  peace,"  (the  brotherly  kiss  as  a  sign  of 
the  communion  of  peace  in  the  Lord,  was 
given  to  newly  baptized  persons,)  "  for 
every  one  of  us,  from  his  religious  feelings, 
ought  to  think  upon  the  creative  hands 
of  God,  fresh  from  their  work,  which  in 
some  sort  we  kiss  in  a  human  being  just 
born,  when  we  embrace  what  God  has 
made But  if  any  thing  could  pre- 
vent man  from  the  attainment  of  grace,  it 
would  rather  be  great  offences,  that  would 
prevent  those  of  riper  age.  But  if  the 
greatest  sinners,  and  those  who  before- 
hand have  sinned  greatly  against  God, 
receive  remission  of  their  sins,  after  they 
come  to  believe,  and  no  one  prohibits 
them  from  receiving  baptism  and  grace, 
how  much  rather  ought  the  infant  not  to 
be  forbidden,  which  being  newly  born, 
cannot  have  sinned,  except  in  as  far  as 
being  born  of  Adam  according  to  the  flesh, 
it  has  contracted  the  contagion  of  the  old 
death  from  its  earliest  birth  ?  It  comes 
more  easily  to  obtain  remission  of  its  sins, 
because  the  sins  which  are  forgiven  to  it, 
are  not  its  own,  but  those  of  another." 

In  the  Alexandrian  Church  also,  which, 
in  regard  to  its  whole  theological  and 
dogmatical  character,  was  so  essentially 
different  from  the  North  African,  we  find 
this  notion  of  the  necessity  of  infant  bap- 
tism prevalent  somewhat  earlier.  Origen, 
in  whose  system  infant  baptism  stood  very 
high,*  though  not  in  the  same  point  of 
view  as  the  North  African  Church,  de- 
clares that  it  is  an  apostolic  tradition,| — a 
declaration  which  cannot,  in  that  century, 
be  considered  of  any  great  weight,  because 
men  were  at  that  time  so  much  inclined 
to  deduce  the    ordinances,    which   they 


Ep.  lix.  [Ep.  Ixiv.  ed.  Ox.] 


*  With  Origen  it  obtains  a  place  in  connection 
with  his  doctrine  that  human  souls  are  heavenly 
beinajs  that  have  sinned,  and  that  they  must  be 
purified  from  the  guilt  that  they  brought  with  them. 
See  below. 

•j-  This  he  does  expressly  in  the  fiflh  book  of 
his  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
according  to  the  Latin  translation  of  Rufinus. 
Similar  difficulties  to  those  which  were  proposed 
by  Tertullian,  were  also  brought  forward  in  the 
time  of  Origen.  Compare  his  Ilomil.  xiv.  in 
Lucam.     (In  the  translation  of  Jerome.) 


ORIGEN — GODFATHERS — SPONSORES. 


thought  of  great  importance,  from  the 
apostles ;  and  besides  this,  there  were 
many  partition  walls  between  this  age  and 
the  apostolic,  which  prevented  a  free  in- 
siglu  into  that  age. 

But  although  in  theory  the  necessity  of 
infant  baptism  was  allowed,  yet  it  was  far 
from  being  generally  prevalent  in  practice. 
And  it  was  not  always  from  pure  motives, 
that  men  were  induced  to  delay  their  bap- 
tism. The  same  false  view  of  baptism,  as 
an  "  opus  operatum,"  which  moved  some 
to  hold  the  unconditional  necessity  of 
infant  baptism,  induced  others,  who  mis- 
took the  nature  of  baptism  far  more  and 
in  a  far  more  dangerous  manner,  to  delay 
their  baptism  for  a  longer  period,  in  order 
that  they  might  give  themselves  up  to  their 
vices,  and,  notwithstanding,  in  the  hour 
of  death,  being  purified  by  the  magical 
annihilation  of  their  sins,  might  be  re- 
ceived into  eternal  life.  We  observed 
above  with  what  pious  indignation,  and 
with  what  force,  the  same  Tertullian,  who 
in  other  respects  opposed  haste  in  baptism, 
combated  this  fancy. 

It  was  probably,  also,  infant  baptism 
which  first  gave  rise  to  the  appointment 
of  baptismal  idtncsses  or  godfathers  ;  for 
as  the  persons  to  be  baptized  in  this  case 
could  not  of  themselves  declare  their  con- 
fession of  faith,  nor  make  the  necessary 
renunciation,  others  were  to  do  it  for 
them,  and  these  engaged  to  take  care  that 
the  children  should  be  duly  instructed  in 
Christianity,  and  should  be  brought  up  to 
a  life  corresponding  to  the  profession  made 
at  their  baptism,  and  hence  they  were 
called  sponsors  (sponsores.)  Tertullian 
brings  it  as  an  argument  against  infant 
baptism,  that  these  sponsors  must  under- 
take an  engagement,  which  they  may  be 
prevented  from  fulfilling,  perhaps  by  their 
own  death,  or  by  the  evil  conduct  of  the 
child.* 

The  si/mhorical  customs,  connected  with 
the  pimple  rite  of  baptism,  were  afterwards 
gradually  multiplied,  at  first  hardly  with 
any  intention  of  increasing  the  holiness 
and  significance  of  the  thing  by  outward 
pomp,  but  because  men  felt  tlicmselves 
impelled  from  within,  to  express  ideas 
and  feelings,  of  which  the  heart  was  full, 
in  a  manner  perceptible  to  the  senses. 
Only  it  was  a  pity  that  men  soon  did  not 
know  how  to  distinguish  these  human 
ornaments    from    the    substance    of    the 


•  Tertullian,  tie  Baptismo,  c.  xviii.  "  Quid 
enim  necesse  est,  Rpoiisorcs  ctiam  pcriculo  ingeril 
quia  et  ipsi  per  mortalitatem  ilestituere  promis- 
siones  suas  pwssunt  et  provcntu  malffi  indolis  falli." 

26 


201 

I  Divine  ordinance  itself,  to  which  they 
were  attached,  and  that  by  the  niultipli- 
I  cation  of  outward  things  they  were  con- 
j  stantly  induced  to  give  them  a  greater 
I  share  of  importance. 

I  From  the  essentially  Christian  idea  of 
the  spiritual  priesthood  of  all  Christians, 
another  custom  was  derived,  which  was, 
that  just  as  anointing,  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, was  the  sign  of  the  priestly  conse- 
cration, so  also  the  newly-baptized  person 
I  should  be  consecrated  to  this  spiritual 
priesthood  by  being  anointed  with  oil, 
expressly  blessed  for  that  purpose.  We 
find  this  custom  first  mentioned  in  Tertul- 
lian, and  with  Cyprian  it  appears  a  neces- 
sary part  of  the  rite  of  baptism.*  The  lay- 
j  ing  on  of  hands,  accompanied  by  prayer, 
I  with  which  the  ceremony  of  baptism  was 
concluded,  is  undoubtedly  older  than  this 
custom.  The  imposition  of  hands  (tTriGfcrK 
\ru»  xfi^wc,  3(j£tg&0£o-»«,  n!D\!jp)  was  the 
1  usual  sign  of  religious  consecration,  bor- 
I  rowed  from  the  Jews,  which  was  used  in 
different  cases  as  the  sign  of  consecration, 
as  well  to  the  common  calling  of  a  Chris- 
tian in  general  as  to  its  particular  branches. 
When  the  apostles  or  the  pastors  of  the 
:  Church  laid  their  hands  on  the  head  of 
the  baptized  person,  they  called  upon  the 
I  Lord  to  bestow  his  blessing  on  the  rite 
I  they  had  now  completed,  and  prayed  that 
j  he  would  suffer  all  which  this  rite  typified 
to  be  fulfilled  in  the  person  now  baptized, 
that  he  would  consecrate  him  with  his 
Spirit  for  his  Christian  profession,  and 
shed  his  Spirit  upon  him.  This  was  the 
closing  rite,  inseparably  united  Avith  the 
j  old  act  of  baptism  ;  all  here  had  reference 

*  Tertullian,  de  Baptismo,  c.  vii.  "  Egressi  de 
I  lavacro  perunguimur  benedicta  unctione  de  pristina 
j  disci|ilina  qua  ungui  oleodccornu  in  saccrdotiuni 
,  solebant."  Adv.  Marcion.  c.  xiv.  de  Res-  Carn.  c. 
j  viii.  But  in  his  book  de  Corona  Militis,  c.  iii., 
[  where  he  mentions  the  customs  belonging  to  bap- 
[  tism  which  are  taken  from  the  tradition  of  the 
I  Church,  and  not  from  Scripture,  he  does  not  name 
:  the  anointing.     Cyprian,  Ep.  ixx.,  in  the   name 

;  of  a  synod  :  "  Ungi  quoque  ncccsse  est  cum,  qui 
baptijsatus  sit,  ut  accepto  chrismate  esse  unctus 
Dei  et  habere  in  se  gratiam  Christi  possit,"  (the 
following  words  about  the  Lord's  Supper,  are 
clearly  a  gloss,  which  destroys  the  sense  of  the 
passage,  ar.d  which  took  its  rise  from  the  after 
mention  of  the  Lord's  Supper,)  "  unde  baptizati 
unguntur  oleo  in  altari  sanclificato"* 

*  [To  make  the  passage  in  a  parenthesis  intel- 
ligible, it  must  be  observed,  that  in  many  editions 

I  of  Cyprian,  there  is  a  full  stop  after  "  possit,"  and 
!  tbe  next  sentence  is  read  thus:  '^Porro  autcm 
I  Euctiarislia  est  unde  baptizati  unguntur,  oleum  in 
'  aliari  sanctifieatum."  J  have  put  the  words  which 
i  Dr.  Neander  condemns  in  italics. — H.  J.  R.] 


202 


ORIGEN    ON    CONFIRMATION. 


to  the  same  principal  matter,  without 
which  no  man  can  be  a  Christian — the 
birth  into  a  new  life  proceeding  from  God, 
the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  which  was  sym- 
bolically represented  by  the  baptism  of 
water.  But  in  after  times,  men  were  led, 
by  a  misunderstanding,  to  separate  these 
two  things  from  one  another  in  an  errone- 
ous manner. 

In  the  apostolic  age,  when  the  Divine 
life  first  entered  into  human  nature  in  its 
rough  state,  which  was  gradually  to  be 
ennobled  by  it,  it  manifested  itself,  as  soon 
as  it  found  entrance,  by  many  striking 
appearances.  There  were  the  marks  of 
the  powerful  energies  it  produced,  which 
ceased  afterwards,  when  the  foundations 
of  the  Ciiurch  being  once  laid,  her  pro- 
gress was  made  more  quietly,  but  which, 
in  those  first  times,  served  to  call  the  at- 
tention of  the  carnal  man  to  Christianity. 
The  indications  of  an  extraordinary  in- 
spiration, which  had  accompanied  the  first 
baptism  of  the  Spirit,  conferred  on  the  first 
Church  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  were  re- 
pealed also  at  the  baptism  of  individuals. 
It,  therefore,  happened,  when  baptism  was 
conferred  on  individuals,  and  the  blessing 
bestowed  on  them  at  the  last  ceremony 
of  laying  on  of  hands,  that  the  Lord  was 
called  upon  in  prayer,  to  make  this  bap- 
tism constantly  efficacious  in  them,  and 
active;  such  actual  proofs  of  its  efficacy 
followed  in  the  case  mentioned  in  Acts 
xix.  6.  When  St.  Peter  and  St.  John 
came  to  Samaria,  in  order  to  inquire  more 
particularly  into  the  efi'ects  of  the  Gospel 
which  had  been  preached  by  Philip,  they 
observed  that  tliese  tokens  of  the  baptism 
of  the  Spirit,  which  were  then  usual,  had  i 
not  been  manifested  at  all  in  those  who  [ 
had  hitherto  been  baptized  there.  (Acts 
viii.)  The  passage  does  not  speak  of  the 
baptism  of  the  Spirit  in  general,  but  only 
of  these  outward  marks  of  it,  and  this 
single  case  can,  therefore,  be  applicable  to  j 
tJiasc  times  only.  The  apostles  only  pray-  ' 
ed  (for  the  abridged  account  which  is  here  I 
given  must  be  supplied  from  other  similar  t 
cases,)  while  they  consecrated  the  baptized 
in  their  usual  manner,  that  these  effects 
of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  might  follow 
here  also — and  it  was  so.  In  tlie  first; 
case,  with  regard  to  St.  Paul,  (Acts  xix. ' 
5,  6,)  baptism  and  laying  on  of  hands  were 
clearly  one  -ir/iole ;  in  the  second  case 
(Acts  viii.,)  where,  nevertheless,  Philip 
appears  to  have  given  the  laying  on  of 
hands  and  baptism  at  the  same  time,  there  i 
were  peculiar  circumstances  which  had  j 
reference   only   to   this   particular   time.  I 


But  still,  from  a  wrong  view  of  these 
cases,  a  notion  was  formed  as  early  as  the 
end  of  the  second  century,  that  the  com- 
munication of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  entirely 
dependent  on  this  sign  of  imposition  of 
hands.  Tertullian,  therefore,  considered 
water  baptism  as  the  preparatory  purifi- 
cation, which  was  to  pave  the  way  for 
the  communication  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
the  person  so  purified,  by  the  imposition 
of  hands  ;*  but  yet,  in  Tertullian,  the 
baptism  and  the  consecration  which  fol- 
lows it,  appear  connected  together  as  one 
tvhole. 

But  when  oncef  the  notion  of  the  ex- 
clusively spiritual  character  of  the  bishops 
had  been  formed,  and  it  was  supposed 
that  they,  as  the  successors  of  the  apostles, 
had  alone  received  all  spiritual  perfection 
by  the  magical  consecration  of  ordination, 
as  well  as  the  right  of  conferring  the  Holy 
Ghost  by  means  of  their  magical  priestlv 
functions,  men  ascribed  also  to  the  bishops 
alone  the  power  of  producing  a  real  bap- 
tism of  the  Spirit.  The  unfounded  view 
from  which  this  notion  proceeded  was  the 
following :  Philip  was  unable  to  confer  a 
true  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  because  he  was 
only  a  deacon ;  the  apostles  supplied  what 
was  here  wanting,  by  means  of  the  seal 
of  baptism  (signaculum,)  the  laying  on  of 
hands.  So,  therefore,  presbyters,  nay, 
even  deacons  also,  in  cases  of  necessity, 
were  entitled  to  baptize ;  but  the  bishop 
alone  could  complete  the  second  part  of 
the  holy  rite.  This  idea  was  fully  formed 
as  early  as  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 
The  bishops  were,  therefore,  obliged  at 
times  to  travel  through  their  dioceses,  in 
order  to  administer  what  was  afterwards 
called  confirmation.!  to  those  who  had 
been  baptized  by  the  parish  priests,  the 
clergy  in  the  country.  In  common 
cases,  where  the  bishoj)  administered  the 
rite  of  baptism  himself,  these  two  were 
nevertheless  joined  together,  and  together 
they  made  up  tke  cojnplcte  rite  of  bap- 
tism.'l 

*  Tertull.  de  Baptismo,  c.  viii.  "  Dehinc  nianus 
imponitur  per  benedictionem  advocans  et  invitans 
Spiritum  sanctum."  In  his  treatise  de  Res.  Carn. 
c.  viii.,  he  names  all  those  three  things  together 
with  baptism,  which  afterwards  were  separated 
from  it,  and  being  united  together  into  one  whole, 
formed  the  sacramentof  confirmation  in  the  liomish 
Church  :  that  is  to  say,  the  anointing  as  the  con- 
secration of  the  soul,  the  making  the  sign  of  the 
cross  as  a  preservative  against  evil,  and  the  laying 
on  of  hands  as  bringing  with  it  the  "  illuniinatio 
Spiritus." 

f  See  above. 

i  Cyprian  speaks  of  a  "  sacrameotum  duplex," 


BAPTISM    OF    HERETICS. 


The  newly-baptized  person  in  many 
Churches  (in  the  North  African  and  the 
Alexandrian,)  received  a  mixture  of  milk 
and  honey,  as  a  symbol  of  his  childhood 
in  a  new  life,  which  was  the  spiritual  in- 
terpretation of  the  promise  about  a  land 
which  (lowed  with  milk  and  honey — a 
promise  which  referred  to  the  heavenly 
country,  to  which  the  baptized  belonged, 
with  all  its  heavenly  advantages.*  He  was 
then  received  into  the  Church  with  the 
first  kiss  of  Christian  brotherhood,  the 
salutation  of  peace,  of  peace  with  God, 
which  he  now  shared  with  all  Christians ; 
and  from  this  time  he  had  the  right  of 
saluting  all  Christians  with  this  token  of 
brolherhood.f 

Before,  however,  we  leave  this  subject, 
we  have  a  controversy  to  mention,  which 
created  a  great  sensation  in  the  latter  half 
of  the  third  century.  The  question  was, 
"What  is  necessary  to  the  validity  of  a 
baptism  ?  What  is  to  be  done  in  regard 
to  a  heretic,  who  comes  to  the  orthodox 
Church,  after  he  has  received  baptism  in 
his  own  sect.?"  Before  any  particular 
inquiries  had  been  set  on  foot  with  regard 
to  this  point,  men  acted  in  different  coun- 
tries in  different  ways,  because,  as  it  com- 
monly happens,  tliey  involuntarily  set  out 
from  different  principles.  In  Asia  Minor 
and  the  neighbouring  regions,  the  light  in 
which  it  was  regarded  was  this,  that  only 
such  baptism  as  had  been  administered  in 

the  baptism  by  water,  and  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit 
represented  by  the  laying  on  of  hands,  "Sacra- 
mento utroque  nasci,"  and  yet  also  of  both  as 
united  in  the  Church  rite  of  baptism.  Ep.  Ixxiii. 
ad  Jubajanum,  and  Ep.  Ixxii.  ad  Stephanum.  We 
must  here  certainly  recur  to  the  flucluating  use 
of  the  word  "  sarramentum,"  by  which  all  holy 
things,  all  holy  doctrines,  and  all  holy  signs  were 
denoted.  After  introducing  the  example  of  Philip 
and  the  apostles,  he  says :  "  Quod  nunc  quoque 
apud  nos  geritur,  ut  qui  in  ecclesia  baptizantur, 
prsepositis  ecclesia  ofTerantur,  et  per  nostram  ora- 
tionem  ac  manus  impositionem  Spiritum  Sanctum 
consequantur  et  signaculo  dominico  constimmen- 
tur."  The  same  representation  occurs  in  the  book 
de  Rebaptismate,  which  was  most  probably  a  con- 
temporary work.  This  rite  is  there  called  "  bap- 
tisma  spiritale."  Cornelius,  (cap.  Euscb.  vi.  3.3,) 
in  regard  to  a  person  who  had  not  been  able  to  re- 
ceive this  confirmation  from  the  bishop,  makes  the 
following  inquiry :  "  How  could  he  without  this 
become  a  partaker  in  the  Holy  Spirit]'' 

*  See  the  above  quoted  passage  from  Tertul- 
lian,  de  Cor.  Mil.  and  Adv.  Marcion.  i.  14.  "  Deus 
mellis  et  lactis  societate  suos  infantat ;"  i.  e.  he  re- 
cognises them  as  his  new-born  children.  Clemens, 
Paid.   i.  p.   103,  i'jiu;  avx-yivvniii/Ti;  Ttriy.MfjiAx  T«f 

juiVii,  IV  ii  /ui}j  KM  yx\x  Ofxlifm  uyxyiy^XTTTXi. 
•j-  "  Osculum  pacis,"  it^mn.     See  above. 


203 

I  the  orthodox  Church,  in  which  alone  all 
I  religious  rites  could  be  duly  administered, 
was  valid,  that  the  baptism  of  heretics  was 
to  be  looked  upon  as  of  no  value,  and, 
therefore,  that  tlie  true  baptism  must  be 
administered  to  one  who  came  over  from 
one  of  the  sects,  just  as  to  a  heathen. 
This  is  very  easily  to  be  'explained  from 
the  violence  of  the  controversial  relations 
wiiich  existed  between  the  Church  and 
the  sects,  just  in  these  very  regions,  as 
well  as  from  the  nature  of  these  sects,  as, 
for  instance  of  the  Gnostic,  which  had 
departed  from  the  commonly  prevailing 
principles  on  the  most  essential  points  of 
doctrine  and  rites.  h\  the  Romish  Cliurch, 
on  the  contrary,  where  on  other  occasions 
the  most  bitter  controversial  spirit  existed 
against  heretics,  men  followed  the  dictates 
of  a  milder  spirit  in  this  question,  because 
here  they  looked  on  the  objective  part  of 
baptism  as  of  most  importance;  tliey  prac- 
tically set  out  from  tiie  principle,  that 
baptism,  by  virtue  of  the  objective  sign 
of  the  name  of  Christ  or  of  the  Trinity, 
which  was  invoked  in  its  celebration,  was 
always  valid,  hy  tohomsoeevr  and  imder 
whatsoever  religious  notions  it  was  ad- 
1  ministered.  Therefore  the  Church  recog- 
'  nised  heretics,  who  came  over  to  her,  as 
baptized  Christians;  and  in  order  that  the 
1  Holy  Spirit  might  make  the  baptism  which 
j  they  had  received  efficacious,  the  bishop 
j  administered  confirmation  to  them  under 
J  the  idea  which  we  have  before  explained 
(and  we  may  observe  that  this  was  one 
of  the  inducements  to  separate  baptism  and 
confirmation.)  As  Churches  were  inclined 
to  form  themselves  on  the  model  of  their 
metrojSolitan  Church  (the  sedes  aposto- 
licae,)  most  of  the  western  Churches  proba- 
bly followed  the  example  of  that  of  Rome. 
But  in  the  latter  years  of  the  second 
century,  this  custom,  which  had  hitherto 
been  observed  in  silence,  became  the  sub- 
ject of  a  particular  investigation  in  Asia 
Alinor;  whether  it  was,  that  the  Monta- 
nistic  Churches,  following  the  principle 
which  prevailed  even  there  also,  those 
who  were  glad  of  any  handle  to  oppose 
the  Montanists,  were  induced  to  make 
this  a  subject  of  controversy,  or  whether 
it  was  from  some  other  cause.  The 
ruling  party  declared  itself  for  abiding  by 
the  old  principle.  Afterwards,  when  this 
matter  was  again  the  subject  of  delibera- 
tion, this,  principle  was  solemnly  con- 
firmed in  two  synods,  assembled  at 
Iconium  and  Synnada  in  Phrygia.  This 
also  introduced  the  point  as  a  subject  of 
controversy  in  other  regions.     Tertullian, 


204 


BAPTISM. 


most  probably  while  he  was  still  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Catholic  Church,  wrote  a  se- 
parate treatise  in  Greek  upon  the  subject, 
in  which  lie  did  not  hesitate  to  dissent 
from  the  Komish  Church  on  this  point. 
It  was  natural  that  he  should  write  on 
this  occasion  in  Greek,  because,  in  the 
countries  where  this  controversy  was  on 
foot,  Greek  was  the  only  language  un- 
derstood, hi  order  to  prove  the  validity 
of  heretical  baptism,  the  opposite  party 
had  already  appealed  to  Ephes.  iv.  5,  6, 
"  One  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one 
God  and  Father  ;"  and  they  drew  from  it 
the  following  conclusion  :  Wherever  we 
iind  that  men  call  upon  the  one  God  and 
the  one  Lord,  there  we  must  recognise 
the  validity  of  their  baptism.  Tertullian, 
however,  says  in  reply,*  "  This  can  only 
relate  to  us,  who  know  and  call  upon  the 
true  God  and  Christ;  the  heretics  have 
not  this  God  and  this  Christ;  and  these 
words,  therefore,  cannot  be  applied  to 
them  :  and  since  they  cannot  duly  admin- 
ister baptism,  it  is  all  one  as  if  they  had 
no  baptism  at  all." 

In  the  North  African  Church,  men 
were  generally  inclined  to  follow  the  ex- 
ample of  the  mother  Church  at  Rome ; 
but  they  were  far  from  meaning  to  submit 
their  own  judgment  to  the  authority  of 
that  Church.t  Seventy  North  African 
bishops,  in  a  council  held  at  Carthage, 
under  the  presidency  of  bishop  Agrippi- 
nus,  declared  themselves  for  the  opposite 
opinion.  Still,  no  party  wished  to  force 
its  views  and  practice  on  the  others  ;  the 
Cliurches  which  differed  on  this  subject, 
did  not  think  of  breaking  the  bond  of 
brotherly  harmony,  on  account  of  a  dif- 
ference that  was  of  such  small  importance 
in  regard  to  the  essentials  of  Christianity. 
But  here  again  it  was  a  Romish  bishop, 
namely,  Stephanus,  who,  moved  by  the 
spirit  of  hierarchical  ambition  and  blind 
zeal,  attributed  so  much  importance  to 
this  controversy.  lie  excommunicated 
the  bishops  of  Asia  Minor,  Cappadocia, 
Galatia,  and  Cilicia,  about  the  end  of  the 
year  253,  and  gave  them  the  name  o(  Re- 
haplizers^  Anabaptists^  {' AtxBaTnia-ra.i)]'^. 
a  name  which,  according  to  their  princi- 
ples, they  did  not  deserve — for  tliey  did 
not  wish  to  administer  a  second  baptism 
to  those  who  had  been  already  baptized, 
but  they  did  not  acknowledge  the  pre- 
vious baptism  by  the  heretics  as  a  proper 
baptism. 


*  De  Baptismo,  r.  xv.  |  Sec  above. 

i  Dionys.  ap.  Euseb.  vii.  6.   Firmilian.  ap.  Cy- 
prian. Ep.  Ixxv. 


From  Asia,  the  discussions  relative  to 
this  matter  extended  themselves  into 
Nortli  Africa.  Here  a  party  had  always 
remained  devoted  to  the  old  Romish  cus- 
tom ;  the  earlier  discussions  had  been  for- 
gotten, and,  therefore,  new  inquiries  and 
investigations  were  commenced  on  the 
subject.  These  induced  Cyprian,  the 
bishop,  to  propose  the  matter  to  two 
synods  held  at  Carthage,  the  one  of 
eighteen,  and  the  other  of  seventy-six 
bishops,  A.  D.  255,  and  both  these  assem- 
blies declared  themselves  in  favour  of 
Cyprian's  opinion,  that  "  the  baptism  of 
heretics  was  not  to  be  acknowledged  as 
valid."  As  he  was  well  aware  how  great 
weight  the  Romish  Church  and  her  adhe- 
rents attached  to  the  antiquity  of  customs, 
and  that  they  gave  out  these  observances, 
which  were  of  long  standing,  as  apostoli- 
cal traditions,  although  cases  like  these, 
from  their  very  nature,  could  scarcely 
have  arisen  in  the  time  of  the  apostles  ; 
he  expressed  himself  in  the  following 
manner  in  a  letter  to  Quintus,  an  African 
bishop,  to  whom  he  communicated  the 
resolution  of  the  council.*  "  But  we  are 
not  to  be  governed  by  custom,  but  over- 
come by  reasoning.  For  neither  did 
Peter,  whom  the  Lord  chose  the  first,  and 
on  whom  He  built  his  Church,  insolently 
and  arrogantly,  when  Paul  and  He  were 
afterwards  a.t  variance  about  circumcision, 
(Gal.  ii.,)!  take  upon  himself  to  say,  that 
he  held  the  primacy,  and  that  the  younger 
and  newer  apostle  must  obey  him ;  nor 
did  he  despise  Paul,  because  he  had  for- 
merly been  a  persecutor  of  the  Church, 
but  he  received  the  counsel  of  truth,  and 
easily  acceded  to  the  just  reasons  which 
Paul  urged :  he  gave  us,  therefore,  an  ex- 
ample of  unity  and  patience,  that  we 
might  not  be  too  much  enamoured  of  our 
own  way,  but  rather  make  that  our  own 
way,  which  is  suggested  to  us  at  times, 
with  profit  and  advantage,  by  our  col- 
leagues, if  it  be  true  and  lawful."  A 
truth,  indeed,  which  it  is  much  more  easy 
to  acknowledge  and  express  than  to  act 
upon,  as  the  history  of  the  Church,  alas  ! 
and  even  the  example  of  Cyprian  himself, 
give  us  to  learn.  lie  made  known  the 
resolutions  of  the  greater  council  to 
Stephanus,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  in  a  let- 
ter which,  while  it  breathes  the  spirit  of 


•  Ep.  Ixxi. 

f  It  is  worth  while  to  observe  how  the  unpreju- 
ihced  and  free-spirited  view  of  tliis  event  had  con- 
stantly been  maintained  in  the  North  African 
Church. 


THE  PNINCIPLES    OF   THE  ROMISH    CHURCH. 


freedom,  is  written  with  delicacy  ;*  but 
Stephanus,  in  an  answer  written  in  a 
hauglity  tone,!  opposed  Cyprian  by  the 
authority  of  the  tradition  of  the  Romish 
Church.  He  went  so  far  in  his  unchris- 
tian blind  zeal,  as  to  indulge  in  unworthy 
abuse  against  his  African  colleagues,  the 
bishops,  who  came  to  him  as  deputies 
from  the  North  African  Church ;  he 
Avould  not  hold  a  conversation  with  them ; 
nay,  he  forbade  his  Church  to  receive 
them  in  their  houses.  Still,  Cyprian  was 
iiir  from  thinking  of  making  his  reason 
submit  to  the  authority  of  the  Romish 
Church.  He  called  together  a  still  more 
numerous  council,  consisting  of  eighty- 
seven  bishops  at  Carthage,  and  this  assem- 
bly also  abided  by  the  principles  which 
had  been  before  expressed.  The  votes 
and  sentiments  of  many  of  these  bishops 
show  a  narrow-hearted  and  fanatical 
hatred  of  heretics,  and  a  pharisaical  idea 
of  the  holiness  of  the  Church.  (A  sort 
of  prelude  this  to  those  struggles  and  con- 
vulsions, which  were  produced  in  the 
North  African  Church,  by  means  of  the 
human  passions  that  mingled  themselves 
with  spiritual  matters.)  And  so  it  hap- 
pened, partly  on  both  sides,  as  is  gener- 
ally the  case  among  men  blinded  by  pas- 
sion, that  while  they  were  striving  about 
the  sign,  they  lost  sight  of  the  thing  itself; 
while  they  were  quarrelling  with  one 
another  about  what  was  required  to  make 
the  outward  sign  of  the  birth  of  the 
spirit  valid,  they  destroyed  the  nature  of 
that  birth  of  the  Spirit !  Cyprian  now  en- 
deavoured to  form  a  connection  between 
himself  and  the  Asiatic  bishops,  who 
thought  with  him,  and  he,  therefore,  com- 
municated the  whole  case  to  one  of  the 
most  honoured  of  the  Asiatic  bishops, 
Firmilianus,  bishop  of  Caesarea,  in  Cappa- 
docia.  Firmilianus  signified  to  Cyprian 
his  entire  concurrence  in  his  views,J  and 
at  the  same  time  spoke  excellently  on  the 
advantages  of  general  deliberations  on 
spiritual  things,  when  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
animated  them.  "  Since  the  Divine  doc- 
trine surpasses  the  limits  of  human  nature, 
and  the  soul  of  man  cannot  embrace  it  in 
its  whole  compass  and  perfection,  there- 
fore, the  number  of  the  prophets  is  so 
great,  in  order  that  Divine  wisdom,  being 
multifarious,  may  be  divided  among  many. 
Therefore,  he  that  has  spoken  first  as  a 
prophet,  is  commanded  to  keep  silence  if 
any  thing  is  revealed  to  a  second  person." 
(1  Cor.  xiv.  30.) 


205 

Dionysius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  whose 
Christian  moderation  we  observed  during 
a  former  controversy,*  distinguished  him- 
self also  in  this  by  the  same  quality.  He 
agreed  on  this  point  with  the  Churches 
of  North  Africa  and  Asia  Minor  in  their 
principles^  which  had  also  been  for  a 
long  time  those  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church  ;t  but  then,  it  was  with  this  dif- 
ference, that  this  frcchrarfcd  man  loas 
viore  inclined  to  make  exceptions  from  the 
rule  in  the  case  of  certain  sects,  whose 
doctrines  were  altogether  in  harmony 
with  the  Church.;}:  But  still,  he  endea- 
voured to  maintain  brotherly  harmony 
with  the  Romish  bishops,  and  to  make 
them  disposed  for  peace.  He  begged  the 
Romish  bishop  Stephanus,  with  most 
touching  representations,  not  to  disturb 
the  Oriental  Church  again  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  that  external  peace,  which  she  had 
received  through  the  emperor  Valerian, 
and  of  the  inward  peace  which  had  ac- 
companied it  (after  the  schism  of  Novatian 
had  been  got  under.)  He  writes  thus  to 
him  :  "•  Know,  my  brother,  that  all  the 
Churches  in  the  East,  and  even  further 
also,  which  were  formerly  divided,  are 
now  united,  and  all  their  prelates  every 
where  are  in  harmonious  agreement,  re- 
joicing beyond  measure  at  the  peace 
which  has  been  accorded  to  them  against 

their  expectation, and  thanking 

God  in  unity  and  brotherly  love."  It 
was  apparently  in  consequence  of  his 
dealing  with  the  Romish  Church  in  this 
spirit  of  love  and  judicious  delicacy,  that 
Stephanus  did  not  venture  to  excommu- 


*Ep.  Ixxii.        -j-  See  above.        \  Ep.  Ixxv. 


*  See  above. 

f  That  the  Alexandrian  Church  also  rejected 
the  baptism  administered  in  the  churches  of  here- 
tics, is  clearly  deducible  from  the  declaration  of 
Dionysius,  in  his  letter  to  Sixtus  II.  bishop  of 
Rome,  (Euseb.  vii.  7,)  when  he  says,  that  the 
members  of  the  Catholic  Church,  who  had  gone 
over  to  the  heretics,  when  they  returned  again  to 
the  (Church,  were  not  rcbaptized,  for  they  had  re- 
ceived the  holy  baptism  already  from  the  bishop ; 
but  then,  it  was  only  in  this  case.  They  did  not 
with  this  acknowledge  the  baptism  administered 
out  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  a  holy  and  valid 
one.  That  in  the  time  of  Clement  the  baptism 
of  heretics  was  considered  invalid  in  the  Alexan- 
drian Church,  appears  to  follow  from  Strom,  i.  p. 
.317,  D.  where  he  explains  Prov.  ix.  8,  (in  the 
Alexandrian  version,)  allegorically,  thus : — to 
^XTrrta-fAi.  ro  a/gsrw-v  oLn  oij>iiicv  )t,xi  yvn<ricv  Jtfoig 
Koyi^o/uivn. 

t  Thus  he  made  such  an  exception  in  favour 
of  the  baptism  administered  in  Montanistic 
Churches,  probably  because  he  thought  more 
mildly  than  others  on  the  relation  of  these  to  the 
general  Church. 

s 


206 


OPPOSITION    OF   THE    AFRICAN    CHURCH. 


nicate  him  also  Vith  the  rest.  He  con- 
tinued his  corrf'spondence  with  Sixtus, 
the  successor  of  Stephanus.  Indeed,  he 
himself  asks  the  advice  of  Sixtus,  in  a 
matter  w  here  they  could  set  out  Irom  the 
same  principles,  in  order  Lo  maintain  the 
bond  of  broilierly  love.*  These  contro- 
versies were  shortly  after  silenced  by 
reason  of  the  struggle  which  the  Church 
had  to  go  through  during  the  persecution 
of  Valerianus  ;  and  probably  also  the 
successors  of  Stephanus  did  not  partake 
in  his  blind  zeal. 

We  have  now,  in  conclusion,  to  con- 
sider more  accurately  the  points  in  con- 
troversy between  these  two  parties,  and 
the  manner  in  which  they  developed 
tliemselves  on  both  sides.  There  were 
two  controverted  points  ;  the  first  of  them 
was  this:  the  Romish  party  held  that  the 
validity  of  baptism  depended  on  its  having 
been  administered  as  Christ  had  com- 
manded.! It  was,  according  to  this  view, 
the  formula  of  baptism  wliich  gave  it  all 
its  objective  validity,  the  subjective  con- 
dition of  the  baptizing  priest,  who  was 
merely  an  instrument,  and  the  place 
where  it  was  an  instrument,  and  the 
place  where  it  was  administered,  had 
nothing  to  do  with  its  validity.  That 
which  is  objectively  Divine,  they  would 
say, can  preserve  its  own  power;  the  grace 
of  God  may  work  objectively  in  this  mode, 
if  it  only  find,  in  the  baptized  person,  a 
soul  capable  of  this  grace ;  and  he  may 
receive  the  grace  of  baptism  by  his  faith 
and  feelings,  wheresoever  he  may  happen 
to  be  baptized.^  Cyprian  reproaches  his 
adversaries  here  with  an  inconsistency, 
against  which  they  could  not  well  defend 
themselves, — it  was  this:  if  the  baptism 
of  the  heretical  Churches  had  an  objective 
validity,  their  confirmation  must  equally 
have  an  objective  validity  also.  "For," 
says  Cyprian,  "  if  any  man  born  (that  is 
to  say,  in  the  new  birth)  out  of  the  pale 


*  Euseh.  vii.  5.  j  Euseb.  vii.  9. 

,  ^  "  Eum,  qui  quoniodocuiiquo  foris  (out  of  the 
Church)  baptizatur,  inente  ct  fide  sua  baptisini 
gratiaui  consequi."  We  must  not  understand  the 
meaning  of  the  Romish  Church  lo  bo,  that  the  use 
of  the  i)roper  formula  of  ba[)tism,  evv»n  in  cases 
where  that  baptism  was,  in  all  other  respects,  un- 
like the  orisfinal  institution,  would  confer  validity 
upon  it.  It  was  presumed  on  both  side?,  that  the 
maiter  un<lcr  discussion  related  to  a  baptism, 
whidi  was  duly  administered  in  other  respects. 
If  the  opponents  of  Stephanus  and  bis  party 
could  have  charged  them  with  anj'  thing  on  this 
account,  they  would  hardly  have  failed  to  do  so. 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  in  the  inquiry  which  he 
makes  of  the  Romish  bishop,  (Euseb.  vii.  9,)  I 
supposes  also  that-  tliey  were  agreed  on  this  point.  1 


of  the  Church,  can  become  a  temple  of 
God,  why  should  not  the  Holy  Spirit  also 
be  shed  upon  this  temple  ?  He  who  is 
sanctified  by  having  laid  aside  his  sins  by 
baptism,  and  is  become  a  new  man  after 
the  Spirit,  is  made  capable  of  receiving 
the  Holy  S|)irit ;  for  the  apostle  says  : 
'  As  many  of  you  as  are  baptized  in  Christ 
have  put  on  Christ:'  and  he,  therefore, 
who  can  put  on  Christ  by  being  baptized 
among  the  heretics,  can  surely  far  more 

receive  the  Holy  Spirit; as  if  Christ 

could  be  put  on  without  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  the  Spirit  be  separated  from  Christ  !"* 

The  other  party  maintained,  on  the 
contrary,  that  only  the  baptism,  which  is 
performed  within  the  true  Church,  as  that 
in  which  alone  the  Holy  Spirit  is  effective, 
can  be  valid.  If  this  were  understood 
only  of  being  outwardly  in  the  Church, 
and  of  belonging  to  it  outwardly,  the  de- 
cision would  here  be  easy  enough.  But 
Cyprian  here  meant  really  an  inward 
subjective  union  with  the  true  Church 
through  faith  and  feelings,  and  he  presup- 
poses the  baptizing  priest  himself,  in  vir- 
tue of  his  faith,  to  be  an  instrument  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  in  order  to  properly 
complete  the  sacramental  acts  by  the 
magical  power  of  his  priesthood ;  as  for 
instance  to  be  able  to  communicate  a 
supernatural  power  to  the  watei-.f  When, 
therefore,  the  matter  was  so  slated,  and 
thus  made  to  depend  on  the  subjective  con- 
dition of  the  priest ;  then  it  would  be 
difficult  in  many  cases  to  decide  on  the 
validity  of  a  baptistn,  and  many  scruples 
might  arise  on  the  subject,  for  who  could 
look  into  the  inward  heart  of  the  priestj 

But  the  Romish  party  went  still  further 
in  their  maintenance  of  the  objective  im- 
portance of  the  formula  of  baptism  ;  it 
even  declared  that  baptism  which  was  ad- 
ministered in  the  name  of  Christ  only, 
without  the   use  of    the  fuller    formula. 


*   Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixxiv. 

■f  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixx.  "  Quomodo  sanctificare 
aquani  potest,  qui  ipse  immundus  est  et  apud  quern 
Spiritus  Sanctus  non  est  1  Sed  et  pro  baptizato 
quam  precem  facere  potest  sacerdos  sacrilegus  et 
peccator?" 

Ep.  Ixxvi.  (Ep.  Ixix.  ed.  Ox.)  "  Quando  haec 
in  ecclesia  fiunt,  ubi  sit  et  accipientis  et  dantis 
fides  Integra." 

i  The  author  of  the  treatise  de  Rebaptismate, 
which  is  found  in  Cyprian's  works,  might  hence 
make  the  objection  :  "  Quid  dii-turus  es  de  his, 
qui  plerumque  ab  episcopis  pessimsD  conversa- 
tionisbaptizantur  ?"  in  reference  to  such  (bishops, 
&c.,)  as  had  been  deprived  after  their  vices  were 
discovered.  "  Aut  (juid  statues  de  eis,  qui  ab  epis- 
copis prave  sentientibus  aut  imperitioribus  fueiint 
baptizati  1" 


BAPTISM    IN   THE    NAME    OF    CHRIST. 


was  objectively  valid.*  Cyprian,  on  the 
coiUiary,  maintained  that  the  formula  was 
of  no  value,  unless  it  was  the  full  formula 
appointed  by  Christ.  We  perceive  here 
the  freer  spirit  of  the  anti-Cyprian  party  ; 
the  idea  was  before  their  eyes,  that  in  the 
belief  in  Christ  every  thing  which  really 
belongs  to  Christianity  was  properly  con- 
tained.j 

Cyprian  himself  would  not  venture  to 
bind  ihe  grace  of  God  on  such  outward 
things  in  regard  to  the  cases  where  con- 
verted heretics  had  once  been  received 
witliout  a  new  baptism,  and  had  enjoyed 
Church  communion,  or  died  in  it.     "•God 


*  It  is  undeniably  clear  that  this  was  held  by 
the  Romish  party,  from  the  lettcrS  of  Cyprian, 
and  the  treatise  de  Rebaptismate.  If  Firmilianus, 
(Ep.  Ixxv.  ap.  Cyprian,)  speaks  only  of  the  for- 
mula in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  it  is,  however, 
by  no  means  clear  that  his  adversaries  also  spoke 
only  of  this.  Firmilianus  brings  forward  only  the 
point,  against  which  in  particular  he  wished  to 
direct  his  arguments,  namely,  the  principle  that 
the  formula  gave  an  objective  validity  to  the  bap- 
tism, and,  therefore,  he  does  not  distinguish  what 
ought  to  have  been  distinguished  in  representing 
the  opinion  of  his  adversaries.  And  yet  one 
catches  a  glimpse  of  the  other  proposition  main- 
tained by  his  opponents,  when  he  says :  "  Nun 
onirics  autem,  qui  nornen  Christi  invocant, 
attdiri"  &.c.  The  book  de  Rebaptismate,  which 
does  not  want  acuteness,  I  think  I  may  certainly 
cite  as  a  contemporary  writing ;  I  cannot  suppose 
(after  Gennadius,  de  Script.  Eccles.)  that  it  was 
written  in  the  fourth  century  or  later,  by  a  monk 
named  Ursinus.  The  author  speaks  like  a  man 
who  lived  in  the  midst  of  these  controversies,  and 
in  the  time  of  the  persecutions,  which  one  cannot 
expect  to  find  in  a  later  writer.  When  he  says 
that  these  controversies  will  produce  no  other  fruit, 
"  nisi  ut  unus  homo,  quicunque  ille  est,  niagnae 
prudentlae  et  constantis  esse  apud  quosdam  leves 
homines  inani  gloria  praedicetur;"  we  see  easily 
that  he  means  Cyprian,  and  none  but  a  contem- 
porary could  have  spoken  of  him  in  this  way. 
The  expression,  however,  "post  tot  seculorum 
tantam  seriem"  in  regard  to  an  old  apostolic  tradi- 
tion, appears  unsuitable  in  the  mouth  of  a  man 
who  lived  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century. 
But  this  expression  would  still  remain  very  hyper- 
bolical, even  if  we  suppose  it  used  by  a  writer  at 
the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  and  in  general, 
strong  hyperbole  is  not  uncommon  among  the 
African  ecclesiastical  writers. 

-(-In  the  book  de  Rebaptismate :  "  Invocatio  hoDC 
ftominis  Jesu  quasi  initium  mysterii  dominici, 
commune  nobis  et  caeteris  omnibus,  quod  possit 
postmodum  residuis  rebus  impleri."  'i'lie  party 
of  Slephanus  did  not  do  badly  to  appeal  to  the 
joy  which  St.  Paul  expresses,  on  finding  that  only 
Christ  had  been  preached,  although  not  exactly 
in  the  proper  manner,  as  was  the  case  with  those 
Judaizing  Christians.  Philip,  i.  IG.  Cyprian, 
who  wishes  to  prevent  them  from  making. use  of 
this  passage,  does  not  understand  it  so  well  him- 
self.    Ep.  Ixxiiu 


207 

is  powerful,"  he  says,  "  to  make  allow- 
ances according  to  liis  mercy,  and  not  to 
exclude  those  who,  having  been  received 
into  the  Church  without  further  ceremo- 
nies, have  fallen  asleep  in  it."*  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria t  relates  a  remarkable  case, 
which  touches  on  these  points :  There  was 
a  converted  heretic  in  the  Alexandrian 
Church,  who  for  many  years  had  lived  as 
a  member  of  the  Church,  and  had  taken 
part  in  the  worship  of  God  in  the  Cluirch. 
Having  attended  the  baptism  of  some  of 
the  catechumens,  lie  remembered  that 
what  he  had  received  for  baptism  in  the 
sect  (probably  a  Gnostic  sect)  from  which 
he  had  been  converted,  was  entirely  un- 
like that  which  he  then  witnessed.  Had 
he  known  that  he,  who  has  Christ  in  faith, 
has  every  thing  which  is  needful  {or  his 
advantage  and  his  salvation,  this  would 
not  have  given  him  so  much  uneasiness. 
But  as  this  was  not  clear  to  him,  he 
doubted  whether  he  could  look  upon  him- 
self as  a  real  Christian,  and  he  fell  into  a 
state  of  great  anxiety  and  disquietude, 
because  he  thought  that  he  was  without 
true  baptism,  and  without  the  grace  of 
baptism.  He  fell  down  at  the  feet  of  the 
bishop  in  tears,  and  prayed  him  to  give 
him  baptism.  The  bisliop  sought  to  tran- 
quillize him,  and  told  him  that  he  could 
not  now  be  first  baptized  afresh,  after  he 
had  so  long  been  a  partaker  in  tlie  body 
and  blood  of  our  Lord.  He  told  him  that 
his  having  lived  so  long  in  tiie  commu- 
nion of  the  Church  ought  to  satisfy  him, 
and  that  he  should  come  with  a  steadfast 
faith  and  a  good  conscience  to  the  holy 
Supper  of  the  Lord.  But  the  wretclied 
man  was  unable  to  overcome  his  scruples 
and  his  unhappiness.  Here  was  an  in- 
stance of  the  unhappy  effects  of  holding 
too  fast  by  outward  things,  and  of  the 
mischief  which  arises  when  men  know 
not  how  to  raise  themselves  with  proper 
freedom  to  the  things  of  the  Spirit,  which 
the  inward  man  embraces  through  faith. 

We  now  proceed  to  the  second  holy 
sign  which  Christ  ordained  for  his  Church, 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord. 

We  here  again  look  back  to  the  first  in- 
stitution of  this  holy  festival,  without 
which  its  history  in  the  first  Church  can- 
not be  understood.  The  last  meal  which 
Christ  partook  of  with  his  disciples  on 
earth   would    naturally    be    full    of   the 


•*  Ep.  Ixx.  [I  am  unable  to  find  this  passage 
and  I  therefore  suppose  the  reference  is  erroneous. 
— H.  J.  R.] 

+  Euscb.  vii.  10. 


208 


THE    LORD  S    SUPPER — LOVEFEAST. 


deepest  importance,  as  the  parting  meal  of 
him  who  was  on  the  point  of  giving  his  life 
for  their  salvation^  and  for  that  of  all 
manJcind,  and  who,  althongh  no  longer 
visible  among  tlieni,  as  at  this  meal,  yet 
as  truly,  and  with  more  powerful  Divine 
influence  and  richer  blessings,  was  about 
to  prove  his  invisible  presence  among 
them,  and  bestow  upon  them  himself  and 
all  his  heavenly  treasures.  The  meal 
which  he  chose  for  this  purpose  was  a 
passover^  i\\e  fimdamenlal  covenant  feast 
of  the  whole  Mosaic  religion^  which,  in 
conformity  with  the  development  of  the 
theocratic  economy,  was  now  to  exchange 
its  earthly  character  for  a  heavenly  one, 
and  to  stand  in  a  similar  relation  to  the 
new  form  of  religion.  The  Jewish  Pass- 
over was  a  feast  of  thanksgiving  for  the 
Church,  which  the  Almighty  Creator, 
the  God  who  permits  the  productions  of 
nature  to  grow  for  the  advantage  of  man, 
had  bestowed  on  the  people,  whom  he 
honoured  with  his  especial  guidance^ 
when  he  saved  them  from  the  bondage 
of  Egypt.  The  master  of  the  house,  who 
kept  tlie  Passover  with  his  family,  and 
distributed  bread  and  wine  among  the 
guests,  thanked  God,  Avho  had  given  these 
fruits  of  the  earth  to  man,  for  the  favour 
which  he  had  bestowed  upon  his  people. 
Hence  the  cup  of  wine,  over  which  this 
praise  of  God  was  pronounced,  was  called 
the  cup  of  praise  or  thanksgiving.*  Christ, 
as  the  master  of  the  House,  here  spoke 
the  Messing ;  but  this  blessing  was  now 
to  receive  a  new  application  in  reference 
to  the  theocracy ;  it  was  to  relate  to  the 
deliverance  from  guilt  and  from  the  pun- 
ishment of  sin ;  to  deliverance  from  the 
bondage  of  sin,  and  the  gift  of  true  moral 
freedom  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  for 
men  ;  and  to  a  preparation  for  the  entrance 
into  a  hoavenly  country, — and  this  was 
the  foundation  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
■which  was  laid  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  deliverance  from  sin  f^orall  humanity. 
Hence  Christ  said,  while  he  gave  bread 
and  wine  to  his  disciples,  that  this  bread 
and  this  wine  were  to  be  to  them — and 
hence  to  all  the  faithful  in  all  ages — his 
body  and  blood  ;  that  body  which  he  was 
offering  up  for  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins, 
for  their  salvation,  and  for  the  establish- 
ment of  a  theocracy  under  new  relations ; 
and  as  this  outward  sign  represented  to 
them  his  body  and  his  blood,  so  truly 


Tilt!.     [The  cup  of  blessing.] 


would  he  be  present  among  them  hereafter 
in  a  spiritual  manner,  as  truly  as  he  was 
now  visibly  present  among  them ;  and 
just  as  they  now  corporeally  enjoyed  this 
bodily  sustenance,  so  should  they  receive 
him,  being  present  by  his  Divine  efficacy, 
wholly  wit.hin  them  to  the  nourishment 
of  their  souls,  they  should  spiritually 
eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood,  (see 
.John  vi.,)  they  should  nieike  his  flesh  and 
blood  their  own,  and  they  should  con- 
stantly suffer  their  nature  to  be  more  and 
more  imbued  with  the  Divine  principle  of 
life,  which  they  would  receive  from  com- 
munion with  him.  Thus  they  were  to 
keep  this  feast  together,  to  glorify  the 
eflects  of  his  suflering  for  the  advantage 
of  human  nature,  and  to  celebrate  their 
inward  lively  communion  Avith  him,  and 
therefore,  with  one  another  also,  as  mem- 
bers of  one  body  under  one  head ;  they 
were  to  keep  this  feast  until,  in  actual 
possession  of  their  heavenly  country,  they 
should  really  enjoy  in  all  its  full  compass 
the  blessedness  which  his  sufferings  ob- 
tained for  them,  and  without  again  fearing 
any  separation  from  him,  they  should  be 
united  with  him  in  his  kingdom,  even  with 
intuitive  reality  and  certainty. 

After  the  model  of  the  Jewish  Pass- 
over, and  the  first  institution  of  this  rite, 
the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ori- 
ginally was  always  joined  with  a  general 
meal,  and  both  together  formed  one  tphole  ; 
and  because  the  communion  of  believers 
with  the  Lord,  and  their  brotherly  com- 
munion with  each  other,  was  represented 
by  it,  the  two  together  were  called  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord,  (^eittvov  tow  xvfiov,  or 
Smrvov  xv^iuKo*,)  or  the  lovefeast,  (ay«7ri).) 
It  was  the  daily  rite  of  Christian  commu- 
nion in  the  first  Church  at  Jerusalem  ;  in 
Acts  ii.  46,  we  are  most  probably  to  un- 
derstand both  together  under  the  phrase, 
xXa»  a^rov.  We  find  both  connected  to- 
gether in  the  first  Corinthian  Church,  and 
one  is  inclined  to  suppose  tliat  this  was 
also  the  innocent  simple  meal  of  the  Chris- 
tians, of  which  Pliny  speaks  in  his  re- 
port to  the  emperor  Trajan.  (See  above, 
Part  L)  On  the  contrary,  in  the  picture 
given  by  Justin  Martyr,  we  find  the  Lord's 
'  Supper  entirely  separated  from  those 
j  meals  of  brotherly  love,  if,  in  fact,  any 
such  existed  at  all  in  the  Churches  which 
he  had  in  his  eye.  The  separation  arose 
partly  from  such  irregularities  as  those 
which  took  place  in  the  Corinthian 
Church,  Avhen  the  .spirit  suitable  to  the 
following  sacred  rite  had  not  prevailed  in 
the  previous  meal,  and  partly  from  local 


LOVEFEASTS,    OR   AGAP^. 


circumstances,  which  prevented  generally 
tlie  institution  of  such  meals  in  common. 
In  Aict,  these  meals  peculiarly  attracted 
the  jealousy  of  the  heatlien,  and  gave  oc- 
casion to  the  wildest  and  most  abominable 
reports;*  and  this  miglit early  cause  their 
abolition,  or,  at  least,  their  less  frequent 
celebration. 

We  now  speak  first  of  these  meals  of 
brotherly  love,  as  they  were  afterwards 
called  (ayaTrai),  when  separated  from  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord.  Here  all  diflerences 
of  earthly  condition  and  rank  were  to 
disappear  in  Christ;  all  were  here  to  be 
one  in  the  Lord  ;  rich  and  poor,  high  and 
low,  masters  and  servants,  were  all  to  eat 
at  tlie  same  table  with  one  another.  Ter- 
tullian  paints  the  celebration  of  such  a 
feast  in  the  following  manner  :t  "Our 
supper  shows  its  nature  by  its  name ;  it 
is  called  ogapp,  which  in  Greek  means 
love.  Whatsoever  it  may  cost,  it  is  a 
gain  to  be  put  to  cost  in  the  cause  of  piety, 
since  we  delight  all  the  poor  by  that  re- 
freshment  As  the  cause  of  the 

supper  is  honourable,  judge  ye  with  what 
I'egard  to  religion  all  besides  is  conducted 
in  it;  it  admits  of  no  vulgarity,  it  admits 
of  no  indecency ;  Ave  do  not  lie  down  to 
table  before  a  prayer  has  been  offered  to 
God ;  we  eat  only  that  which  hunger  re- 
quires, .we  drink  only  what  it  becomes 
men  of  sobriety  and  modesty  to  drink ; 
we  do  not  forget,  while  we  are  satisfying 
our  wants,  that  God  is  to  be  adored  by  us 
tlu-ough  the  night.  The  conversation  is 
that  of  men,  who  know  that  God  hears 
them.  (After  die  meal  is  over.)  After 
we  have  washed  our  hands,  and  the  lights 
have  been  brought,  each  person  is  required 
to  sing  something  to  the  praise  of  God  for 
the  instruction  of  all,  just  as  he  may  be 
able  from  Scripture  or  from  his  own 
resources;  and  tliis  shows  what  a  man 
has  drunk.  The  feast  is  concluded  with 
prayer."  These  agapaj  gradually  lost  their 
true  original  meaning,  which  could  only 
be  maintained  in  the  simple  habits  of  the 
very  earliest  Churches;  and  they  often 
became  nothing  but  a  dead  form,  which 
was  no  longer  animated  by  the  spirit  of 
that  brotherly  love,  which  removes  all 
distinctions  between  man  and  man,  and 
unites  all  hearts  together.  Many  abuses 
crept  into  them,  which  gave  an  oppor- 


^     209 


tunity  to  the  evilminded  to  represent  the 
whole  festival  in  a  hateful  light.  As  it 
usually  happens  in  cases  of  this  kind, 
some  attributed  too  much  importance  to 
the  mere  form,  as  an  "  opus  operatum/' 
and  others  unjustly  condenuied  the  whole 
thing,  w  ithout  distinguishing  between  the 
proper  use  and  the  abuse;  and  the  error 
of  both  parties  arose  from  their  no  longer 
understanding  the  simple  childlike  spirit 
from  which  this  rite  had  derived  its  origin. 
Certain  rich  members  of  the  community 
gave  these  agapae,  and  fancied  that  they 
had  done  something  particularly  merito- 
rious ;  here,  where  all  should  be  on  equal 
terms,  a  distinction  of  ranks  was  made, 
and  the  clergy,*  who  ought  to  set  an 
example  of  humility  to  all,  allowed  them- 
selves to  be  particularly  distinguished  by 
the  undue  exercise  of  an  outward  pre- 
ference to  their  order.!  An  unkindly, 
gloomy,  ascetic  spirit  wholly  condemned 
the  agapae,  and  eagerly  caught  at  all  the 
abuses  which  ever  attended  their  cele- 
bration in  any  place  whatever,  in  order  to 
paint  them  in  exaggerated  p olours,  and  so 
to  render  the  whole  tiling  odious;  and  this 
was  the  case  with  TertuUian  in  his  Mon- 
tanism.J  Clement  of  Alexandria  speaks 
more  temperately  on  the  subject,§  although 
he  declares  himself  against  those,  who 
thought  that  they  could  buy  the  promises 
of  God  by  giving  feasts,  and  who  appeared 
to  lower  the  name  of  heavenly  love  by 
limiting  it  to  these  agapae.     He  says : — 


*  In  speaking  of  the  impediments  a  Christian 
wife  would  find  in  her  marriage  with  a  heathen, 
TertuUian  says,  (ad  Uxor.  ii.  4,)  "  Quis  ad  con- 
vivium  illud  dominicum,  quod  infamaut,  sine  sua 
buspicione  dimittef?" 

\  Apologeticus,  c.  xxxix. 

27 


*  ["  Die  Geistlichen."  German. — I  have  some 
difficulty  in  translating  this  word,  in  consequence 
of  Dr.  Neander's  notions  on  the  subject  of  the 
priesthood.  In  using  the  words,  "  the  clergy,"  I 
give  the  notion  of  a  body  of  clergy,  at  a  time  when, 
perhaps,  he  would  hardly  allow  of  any  thing  of  the 
sort.  I  suppose  he  means  the  presbyters  and 
deacons;  but  if  so,  it  would  seem  that  they  became 
a  distinct  body  rather  early. — H.  J.  R.] 

-\  Thus  the  clergy  received  a  double  portion,  in 
consequence  of  a  perverted  and  carnal  application 
of  the  passage  in  1  Tim.  v.  17.*  TertuUian,  after 
becoming  a  Montanist,  says,  in  his  treatise  de 
Jcjuniis,  c.  xvii. :  "  Ad  elogium  gulce  tua;  pertinet, 
quod  duplex  apud  te  praesidentibus  honos  binis 
partibus  deputatur."  Comp.  Apostol.  Constit. 
lib.  ii.  c.  28,  where  that  which  TertuUian  properly 
blames  is  prescribed  as  a  law.  Clemens,  Strom, 
vii.  759,  says  of  the  Gnostic  sects,  «'  nuvcruui  it% 

i  De  Jejuniis,  c.  xvii.  "Apud  te  agape  in 
cacabis  fervet ;  major  est  agape,  quia  per  banc 
adolescentes  tui  cum  sororibus  dormiunt."  So 
passionate  an  accuser  will  naturally  appear  un- 
worthy of  credit. 

§  Pffidag.  ii.  141.  [Pott.  p.  166.  7.   Sylb.  p.  61.] 

*  [This  passage  has  been  already  adduced  on 
another  occasion,  p.  108.  I  must  refer  to  the  pre- 
face for  a  few  further  remarks  upon  it.— H.  J.  R.J 

s2 


CONSECRATION    OF   THE    LORD  S    SUPPER. 


210     ^ 


"  Love  is  really  a  heavenly  sustenance.  .  . 

.  .  In  heaven  is  this  heavenly  feast ;  but 
though  the  earthly  feast  arises  from  love, 
yet  it  is  not  love  itself,  but  only  the  proof 
of  a  benevolence,  which  is  ready  to  impart 
and  communicate.  Take  care,  therefore, 
that  your  treasure  be  not  ill-spoken  of,  for 
the  kingdom  of  God  consists  not  in  meat 
and  drink,  but  righteousness,  peace,  and 
joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  that  partakes 
of  this  meal  will  obtain  the  best  of  all 
things,  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  while  he 
strives  even  here  below  to  belong  to 
the  holy  assembly  of  love,  the  heavenly 
Church.  Love  is  a  pure  thing,  and  worthy 
of  God,  and  to  bestow  is  one  of  its  deeds ; 

....  but  these  feasts  have  only  a  spark 
of  love,  which  is  lighted  by  earthly  food." 
We  now  go  to  the  separate  considera- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

We  have  already  observed  that  the 
prayer  of  praise  and  thanks  in  the  Jewish 
Passover  was  transferred  to  the  Christian 
Supper  of  the  Lord  ;  this  prayer  of  praise 
and  thanksgiving  was  always  looked  upon 
as  an  essential  part  of  this  rite,  which 
hence  obtained  the  name  of  li-jfa^iaTia..* 
While  the  principal  minister  of  the  Church 
[the  Gemeindevorsteher,  or  president,] 
took  up  the  bread  and  wine  from  the  table 
that  stood  before  him,  he  thanked  God  in 
the  name  of  the  whole  Church,  because 
he  had  created  the  things  of  nature,  which 
were  here  represented  by  the  most  essen- 
tial means  of  sustenance,  for  the  sake  of 
man,  and  that  he,  the  Creator,  had,  for  the 
sake  of  man  also,  allowed  his  Son  to 
appear  and  to  suffer  in  the  nature  of  man. 
Both  of  these,  the  thanksgiving  for  the 


•  The  expression  ^■^^^ftv'nx  is  a  metonymical 
one,  entirely  to  be  compared  with  that  of  St.  Paul, 
s-crhgKV  fvX'-'j./ac,  0  ijK'.y.tjfxti,  or  that  of  Justin  Mar- 
tyr, 6  ev;^:<g<!rT«6a?  c^to?  x.u  o/i/oc,  the  bread  and 
wine  over  which  the  prayer  of  thanks  (the  bless- 
ing,) has  been  spoken.  The  latter  says  expressly, 
that  as  soon  as  the  president  had  uttered  the  prayer 
over  the  bread  and  wine,  and  the  Church  had  said 
amen  after  it,  the  supper  was  distributed.  [Apol. 
i.  c.  Ixxxv.]  He  mentions  no  other  consecration; 
he  says:  tjiv  </V  ei';t'<c  Aojct/  tcu  tt-x^  auTou  (tcu 
X^ta-Tcv)  f'j)(_ct.^t<7Tif()(i<rav  Tficipnv,  which  cannot  allude 
to  a  form  of  words  handed  down  from  Christ 
himself,  for  there  was  nothing  of  the  kind,  but 
only  in  general  to  Ihe  thanksgiving  which  was 
established  by  him,  and  which  was  used  at  this 
festival  after  his  example.  It  is  possible  that  the 
words  containing  the  institution  of  the  feast,  may 
have  been  interwoven  into  this  prayer.  In  the 
words  of  Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixxx.:  "In  vocatione  non 
contemtibili  sanctificare  pancm  et  tucharistiam 
facere;"  there  seems  to  be  a  notion  conveyed  of  a 
consecration,  by  which  common  bread  became 
changed  to  the  Supper  of  our  Lord. 


gifts  of  nature,  and  that  for  the  blessings 
of  grace,  were  closely  connected  together, 
for  it  was  only  after  man  was  redeemed, 
when  he  returned  to  the  condition  of  a 
child  in  regard  to  his  heavenly  Father, 
that  he  could  justly  know  how  all  has 
been  given  to  him  by  the  love  of  liis 
heavenly  Father ;  all  earthly  gifts  had  for 
Him  a  higher  meaning,  as  pledges  of  an 
eternal  love,  about  to  bestow  far  higher 
benefits  on  man.  All  nature,  Avhich  had 
before  been  desecrated  by  him,  when  he 
was  in  the  service  of  sin,  and  stood 
estranged  from  God,  was  now  sanctified 
and  given  back  to  him,  a  redeemed  crea- 
ture ;  and  in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  the 
earthly  and  the  natural  became  ennobled 
as  the  symbols  or  the  bearers  of  the 
heavenly  and  the  Divine.  A  higher  and 
heavenly  food  for  the  life  of  the  inward 
man  would  now  be  connected  with  this 
earthly  food,  which  had  been  sanctified 
by  the  prayer  of  thanksgiving,  through 
the  power  of  that  same  God,  who  had 
caused  this  earthly  food  to  grow  for  the 
use  of  man.  (The  different  representa- 
tions of  the  relation  between  the  sign  and 
the  thing  signified,  we  here  leave  un- 
touched.) 

This  connection  of  ideas  was  a  very 
favourite  one  among  the  first  Christians, 
and  was  often  used  by  them  in  contro- 
verting the  contempt  of  nature  shown  by 
the  Gnostics.  And  here  also  there  was 
an  allusion  to  a  peculiar  custom  observed 
in  the  Church  at  this  time ;  the  members 
of  the  Church  themselves  brought  the 
wine  and  bread  as  free  gifts,  and  out  of 
these  offerings  the  elements  were  taken 
for  the  Lord's  Supper.*  These  gifts  \fere 
considered  as  the  spiritual  sacrifice  of 
thanksgiving  of  Christians.  When  the 
minister  took  the  elements  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  from  these  gifts,  and  consecrated 
them  to  God  with  praise  and  prayer,  he 
represented  the  whole  Church,  considered 
as  one  priestly  race,  as  one  in  the  Lord, 
and  he  represented  her  readiness  again  to 
consecrate  to  the  service  of  God  all  which 
she  received  from  God.  This  Christian 
sacrifice  of  thanks  was  considered  as  a 
spiritual  sacrifice,  which  existed  only  in 

*  This  custom,  which  may  be  pretty  clearly 
presumed  from  the  allusions  of  a  Justin  Martyr, 
and  of  an  Irenteus,  is  expressly  stated  by  Cyprian 
in  his  work  de  Opere  et  Eleemosynis,  where  he 
blames  the  rich  woman  for  coming  to  the  com- 
munion without  giving  an  offering  of  love  for  the 
necessities. of  the  Church.  "  Locuplcs  et  dives  es 
ct  dominicum  celebrare  te  credis,  quce  in  domini- 
cum  sine  sacrificio  vcnis,  quse  partem  dl  sucrijicio, 
quod  pauper  obtulit,  suraisi" 


OBLATIO    AT   FIRST    SYMBOLIC. 


the  heart,  and  as  the  free  expression  of 
childlike  love  and  thankfulness,  and  was 
contrasted  with  the  sacrifice  of  victims  in 
the  Jewish  and  the  heathen  service.  Partly 
tliese  gifts  of  the  Christians,  partly  the 
thanksgiving  prayer  of  the  minister,  by 
which  they  were  consecrated  to  God,  and 
at  last,  partly  tlie  whole  of  the  Supper  of 
the  Lord  was  considered  as  an  offerings 
and  called  ir^oa<pof*,  6j^o-»a,  but  it  was  at 
first  only  in  this  sense.*  In  this  point  of 
view,  Justin  Martyr  says,|  "The  prayers 
and  thanksgiving  that  come  from  worthy 
men,  are  the  only  true  sacrifices,  well 
pleasing  to  God ;  for  tlvcse  alone  have 
Christians  learned  to  make,  and  particu- 
larly in  remembrance  of  their  sustenance, 
which  consists  of  dry  and  moist  things,J 
by  which  they  are  also  led  to  remember 
the  sufferings  which  Christ  underwent  for 
their  sake."  He  considers  this  a  proof  of 
the  high  priestly  character  of  Christians, 
because  God  receives  sacrifice  only  from 
his  priests.  In  this  sense  Irenaeus,§  while 
he  is  contrasting  this  spiritual  sacrifice 
with  every  kind  of  sacrificial  worship, 
speaks  thus :  "  It  is  not  sacrifices^  which 
sanctify  the  man,  but  the  conscience  of  him 
that  offers,  if  it  be  pure,  sanctifies  the 
offering,  and  causes  God  to  receive  it  as 
from  a  friend." 


*  Hence  comes  the  expression  so  common  in 
Cyprian,  "  Oblationem  alicujiis  accipere,  ofTerre;" 
and  to  receive  these  gifts  from  any  one  for  the 
Church,  to  take  the  elements  for  the  Supper  of  the 
Lord  from  them,  and  to  consecrate  them,  was  a 
proof  that  such  a  person  was  considered  as  a  regu- 
lar member  of  the  Church.* 

f  Just.  M.  Dial.  Tryph.  Jud.  p.  345.  [p.  340, 
cd.  Jebb.] 

t  [The  bread,  wine,  and  water  of  the  Eucharist. 
See  Jebb's  note.— H.  J.  R.] 

§  Iren.  iv.  18. 

*  [The  question,  how  far  the  Lord's  Supper  is 
a  sacrifice,  is  by  far  too  wide  a  field  to  enter  upon 
in  this  place.  I  think,  however,  that  the  compari- 
son between  the  Jewish  prayer  o(  benediction  atifi 
the  Christian,  is  a  subject  which  demands  a  fuller 
investigation  than  is  here  given.  Those  who 
consider  the  Eucharist  a  proper  sacrifice,  do  not 
allow  this  comparison  to  hold — they  coniend  that 
Christ  had  before  "  performed  the  office  of  a  mas- 
ter at  the  Paschal  feast."  and  that,  after  supper, 
when  the  Paschal  meal  was  over,  he  blessed  the 
bread  and  cup  as  pledges  of  the  new  covenant,  and 
that  he  "did  then,  under  the  8yml)ol  of  l)rcad, 
offer  his  body,  and  under  the  symbol  of  wine,  pour 
out  his  blood  ;" — offerinfr  these  symbols  to  God  as 
typical  of  his  own  sacrifice.  It  is  impossible  here 
to  do  more  than  to  hint  at  this  view  of  the  matter, 
and  to  recommend  its  thorouph  investigation. 
The  works  which  take  the  strongest  views  in 
defence  of  the  proper  sacrifice,  are  perhaps,  John- 
son's Unbloody  Sacrifice,  and  Hickes  oti  the 
Christian  Priesthood.  The  words  in  inverted 
commas  are  from  the  former,  vol.  i-  p.  178. — H. 
J.  R.] 


211 

Accordingly,  the  idea  of  a  sacrifice  in 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  was  originally 
entirely  of  a  symbolical  kind,  and  this 
idea  originally  had  not  the  least  reference 
to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  It  was  only 
the  spiritual  offering  of  praise  by  the 
Christians,  which  was  thought  of,  but 
this  certainly  presupposed  the  sacrifice  o*" 
Christ  for  man.*  Afterwards,  however, 
the  reference  to  this  latter  sacrifice  be- 
came more  prominently  brought  forward; 
but  still,  only  as  implying  the  symbolical, 
or  the  commemorative,  representation  of 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  But  as  one  error 
produces  another,  the  false  representation 
of  a  particular  priesthood  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church  which  was  to  correspond  to 
that  of  the  Old  Testament,  might  occa- 
sion the  erroneous  notion  of  a  sacrificial 
worship  performed  by  the  pretended  priest, 
which  would  also  answer  to  the  sacrifice 
of  the  Old  Testament;  and  this  false 
comparison,  and  this  transference  of  no- 
tions from  the  Old  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, was  the  cause  that  the  idea  of  a 
sacrifice  in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  which 
was  originally  quite  symbolical,  received 
a  turn  entirely  at  variance  with  its  real 
character — a  turn  which  gave  it  something 
of  a  magical  character,  of  which  we  find 
traces  as  early  as  the  time  of  Cyprian. 

The  usual  sort  of  bread,  which  was 
brought  by  the  members  of  the  Church, 
was  used  for  the  Supper  of  the  Lord. 
Justin  Martyr  calls  it  expressly,  "  com- 
mon bread,"  (xo»»o5  agro?;)  those  who 
went  on  the  supposition  that  Christ  cele- 
brated the  festival  of  the  Passover  a  day 
earlier  than  usual,  had  no  reason  at  all  to 
use  any  thing  but  the  common  sort  of 
bread  in  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper;  and  even  those  who  were  of  a 
different  opinion,  did  not  think  the  use  of 


•  One  place  of  Irenaeus  seems  to  contradict 
what  is  here  advanced,  (iv.  18.  §  4.)  "Verbuin 
quod  ofTertur  Deo ;"  as  if  the  Logos  itself,  t.  f. 
Christ,  were  offered  up  to  God  in  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. But  even  if  there  were  no  other  readincf  in 
existence,  this  at  any  rate  cannot  be  the  genuine 
one — for  such  an  expression  would  not  only  plainly 
contradict  the  rest  of  the  system  of  Irensus,  which 
is  clearly  declared,  but  here  it  would  not  suit  what 
immediately  goes  before.  He  had  just  said,  "  Of- 
fertur  Deo  ex  creatura  ejus,"  (this  relates  also  to 
the  offering  of  bread  and  wine,)  and  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  §  6,  he  says,  "per  Christum  offcrt 
ecclesia."  Undoubtedly,  therefore,  the  reading  of 
other  MSS.  must  be  received  as  the  genuine  read- 
ing, "per  quod  offcrtiir."  It  is  the  constant  re- 
ference  to  Christ  as  the  high-priest,  which  gives 
the  proper  consecration,  as  well  to  this  spiritual 
offering  as  to  the  whole  life.  This  was  the  mean- 
ing of  Irenseus. 


212 

unleavened  bread  an  essential  part  of  the 
performance  of  this  rite.  We  find,  how- 
ever, one  exception  in  the  case  of  some 
Judaizing  Christians,*  which  arose  from 
the  very  nature  of  the  case ;  for  as  they 
kept  a  festival  in  commemoration  of  that 
Last  Supper  of  our  Lord,  only  once  a  year 
at  the  Passover,  it  naturally  happened  that, 
as  Christians  who  were  continuing  in  the 
observance  of  the  Jewish  ceremonial  law, 
they  would  eat  unleavened  bread."j"  As 
among  the  ancients,  and  especially  in  the 
East,  it  was  not  customary  to  drink  pure 
wine,  unmixed  with  water,  at  meal  times, 
it  was  hence  supposed  that  Christ  also 
used  wine  mixed  with  water.  The  taste 
for  higher  and  mysterious  meanings,  how- 
ever, did  not  content  itself  with  this  sim- 
ple, but  apparently  too  trivial,  explanation 
of  this  custom,  which  had  become  general. 
The  mixture  of  the  water  and  the  wine, 
was  to  represent  the  union  of  the  Church 
with  Christ.J 

Originally,  the  general  celebration  of 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  united  with  the 
celebration  of  the  lovefeast,  was  a  mark 
of  daily  Christian  communion.  When 
these  daily  assemblies  could  no  longer 
take  place,  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  be- 
came an  essential  part  of  the  Sunday 
worship,  as  it  appears  in  Justin  Martyr, 
and  the  whole  congregation  took  part 
in  the  communion,  as  they  had  respond- 
ed to  the  preceding  prayer  by  their 
Amen.  The  deacons  brought  the  bread 
and  wine  to  each  of  the  assembly  in 
order.  It  was  held  necessary  that  all  the 
Christians  resident  in  the  town  should 
constantly  continue  in  union  with  the 
Lord  and  with  his  Church,  by  partaking 
of  this  communion  \  and  the  deacons, 
therefore,  carried  a  portion  of  the  conse- 
crated bread  and  wine  to  the  strangers, 
the  sick,  or  the  prisoners  who  were  pre- 
vented from  attending  the  congregation.§ 


COMMUNION    UNDER    ONE    KIND. 


•  Epiphanius  (Hteres.  xxx.  §16,)  says  of  the 
Ebionltes  of  his  time,  that  they  celebrated  the 
communion  once  a  year  with  unleavened  bread 
and  water.  (The  latter  was  because  their  ascetic 
habits  would  not  allow  the  use  of  wine.) 

-(•  See  below,  in  the  remarks  on  the  Ebionites. 

i  "  Quando  in  calice  vino  aqua  niiscetur,  Chris- 
tus  populo  adunatur."     Cyprian,  Ep.  Ixiii. 

§  Sec  the  passage  which  we  have  already  quoted 
from  Justin  Martyr,  and  that  of  Iren;cuH,in  Euseb. 

V.   24,  TrijUTTitV  1-j-^J.iilTTlM  T«C    "^5  TCcl'  ^T^glW^iV  Ta- 

erju^tv,  where  he  is  speaking  of  the  Komisb  bishops. 
It  was  thus  that  the  custom  arose  of  communicat- 
ing with  elements  that  had  before  been  consecrated 
(which  were  afterwards  called  Tg^oifyfx'rfA.irx.)  The 
notion,  on  which  this  was  founded,  was  that  a 
communion  could  oidy  have  its  right  meaning  in 
the  midst  of  a  community ;  and  hence  the  com- 


I  But  in  many  Churches,  as  for  instancp, 
I  in  the  North  African,  the  daily  enjoyment 
of  the  communion  was  held  to  be  neces- 
sary, because  they  looked  upon  it  as  the 
j  daily  bond  of  union  between  the  Lord 
'  and  the  Church,  and  the  daily  means  of 
I  strengthening,  enlivening,  and  salvation, 
I  for  Christians.  Hence,  Tertullian  and 
Cyprian  understand  the  prayer  for  daily 
bread  in  a  spiritual  sense,  and  apply  it  to 
an  unbroken  and  sanctifying  union  with 
Christ,  by  means  of  the  Supper  of  the 
Lord.  But  as  the  daily  service  and  cele- 
bration of  the  Lord's  Supper  no  longer, 
existed,  there  was  no  other  means  left  to 
accomplish  this  object,  than  to  take  home 
some  of  the  consecrated  bread,  which 
might  stand,  in  case  of  necessity,  instead 
of  the  whole  communion.  (This  is  the 
first  trace  of  a  reception  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  under  one  kind,  which  was  intro- 
duced through  error  and  abuse.)  Thus 
every  man,  after  the  morning  prayer,  be- 
fore he  went  to  his  eartldy  business,  en- 
joyed the  sacrament  with  his  family  in 
his  own  -house,  in  order  that  the  life  of 
the  whole  following  day  might  be  sancti- 
fied by  communion  with  the  Lord.  Oh ! 
that  men  had  known  how  to  distinguish 
properly  the  spiritual  feast,  which  was  to 
continue  throughout  the  whole  of  the 
Christian's  life,  from  the  outward  Supper 
of  the  Lord,  perceptible  to  the  senses  I* 

munion  of  an  absent  individual  could,  therefore, 
only  bo  considered  in  the  light  of  a  conttnuatior> 
of  that  general  communion  of  the  assembled 
Church.  But  when  Cyprian  speaks  of  the 
"  presbyter!  apud  confessores  offerentes,"  he  pro- 
bably there  means,  that  the  Lord's  Supper  vfas 
consecrated  by  the  priests  themselves. 

*  The  following  passages  refer  to  this  custom : 
Tertullian,  (ad  Uxor.  ii.  5,)  in  speaking  of  the 
jealousy  of  a  heathen  husband  towards  a  Chris, 
tian  wife  :  "  Non  scict  maritus,  quid  secreto  ante 
omnem  cibum  gustes?  Et  si  sciverit  panem,  non 
ilium  credit  esse,  qui  dicitur."  And  also,  in  the 
parts  of  the  treatise  deOratione,  first  published  by 
Muratori,  c.  xix.,  "  Accepto  corpore  Domini  et  re- 
servato  (by  the  Christian  mistress  of  a  family,) 
area  sua,  in  qua  Domini  sanctum  fuit."  Cyprian, 
de  Lapsis,  ed.  Baluz.  p.  189.  [p.  132,  ed.  Ox.]' 
In  the  book  de  Spectaculis,  ascribed  to  Cyprian, 
he  says  of  a  man  who  runs  from  church  to  the 
theatre,  "Festinans  ad  spectaculum,  dimissus  e 
dominico  et  adhuc  gerens  secuih,  ut  assolet,  Eu- 
charistiam." 


*  [I  suppose  there  is  some  misprint  in  this  note. 
The  Latin  words  hrfore  the  parenthesis  are  from 
Tertullian,  those  after,  are  from  Cyprian.  They 
are  tindivided  in  both  editions  of  Dr.  Neander. 
Possibly,  however,  (as  the  words  in  Cyprian  are 
"arcam  anam,"  &c.,)  Dr.  Neander  has  intended 
to  join  the  two  quotations,  and  complete  the 
sense  by  putting  "  area  sua"  in  the  ablative  case. 
-H.  J.  R.] 


CYPRIAN    ON    MOURNING. 


Others,  perhaps,  set  out  from  the  notion, 
that  men  ought  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  only  after  a  whole  course  of  parti- 
cular preparation  of  the  inward  man,  and 
therefore,  only  at  stated  seasons,  chosen 
according  to  the  particular  convenience  of 
the  individual.  •  The  learned  Hippolytus, 
who  lived  in  the  first  half  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, wrote,  even  in  those  days,  a  treatise 
on  the  question — whether  a  man  ought  to 
communicate  daily,  or  at  stated  seasons  ?* 

As  it  was  in  the  North  African  Church 
that  the  necessity  of  infant  baptism  was 
first  peculiarly  insisted  on,  so  also  did 
they  join  with  this  notion  that  of  infant 
communion;  for,  as  men  did  not  distin- 
guish the  sign  and  the  Divine  thing  signi- 
fied by  it  sufficiently  from  one  anotlier, 
and  as  they  understood  all  that  is  said  of 
eating  the  flesh  and  drinking  the  blood  of 
Christ,  in  .John  vi.,  of  the  outward  parti- 
cipation of  the  Lord's  Supper,  this  sacra- 
ment, they  concluded,  must  be  entirely 
necessary  for  the  attainment  of  salvation 
from  the  very  first.l 

The  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
was  the  seal  of  every  consecration  to  a 
religious  purpose ;  it  was  used  at  the 
conclusion  of  a  marri.age^'l  as  well  as  at 
the  service  for  the  commemoration  of  the 
dead.  We  shall  take  a  somewhat  nearer 
view  of  the  latter  of  these  rites. 

Christianity  did  not  annihilate  the 
natural  feelings  of  man,  but  only  ennobled 
them  ;  it  was  as  much  opposed,  on  the 
one  hand,  to  a  corrupted  civilization,  that 
woukl  overwhelm  natural  feelings,  as,  on 
the  otiier,  to  a  wild,  unbridled  indulgence 
of  them  in  a  rude  state  of  nature ;  and 
thus  also  it  showed  the  same  character  in 
regard  to  mourning  for  the  dead.  From 
the  very  beginning,  Christianity  con- 
demned the  wild  and  often  hypocritical 
expressions  of  grief,  by  which  funeral 
processions  were  accompanied,  and  it 
protested  against  the  shrieks  of  the  hired 

*  See  Jerome,  Ep.  Ixxi.  ad  Lucin.  [This  is 
Ep.  xxviii.  in  the  edition  of  Victorius.  Paris, 
\?>n,  torn.  i.  p.  247,  d.— H.  J.  R.] 

f  Thus  it  happened  that  they  gave  only  wine  to 
children  who  could  not  eat  bread.  Comp.  Cyprian, 
de  Lapsis.  This  is  another  example  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  a  superstitous  abuse,  contrary  to  the 
insiitution  itself,  led  men  to  separate  the  elements 
of  the  sacrament,  and  communicate  under  one 
kind.  [There  is  a  very  elaborate  Treatise  by 
Zomius  on  the  subject  of  the  Etirharist  of  In- 
fants. The  title  is  "Petri  Zornii  Historia  Eucha- 
ristiae  Infantium,  &c."  Berolini,  1736.  See  also 
Bingham,  Antiq.  xii.  4,  7;  xv.  7,  4. — H,  J.  R.] 

t  "  Oblatio  pro  matrimonio."  On  the  meaning 
of  this  word  "oblatio,"  see  above. 


2113 

women  called  "  propficaj ;"  and  yet  it  re- 
quired no  cold  stoical  resignation  and 
apathy,  but  only  softened  and  ennobled 
the  bitterness  of  lamentation  by  the  spirit 
of  faith  and  hope,  and  of  a  childlike  ac- 
quiescence in  the  dealings  of  eternal  love, 
a  love  which  takes  away — only  to  give 
again  in  greater  splendour  and  reality; 
which  divides — only  to  unite  again  those 
whom  it  has  divided,  in  a  glorified  state 
for  all  eternity.  When  multitudes  were 
carried  away  by  a  desolating  pestilence 
at  Carthage,  Cyprian  said  to  his  Church  : 
"  Our  brethren  are  not  to  be  lamented, 
who  are  freed  from  the  world  by  the  call 
of  the  Lord ;  surely  we  know  that  they 
are  not  lost,  but  sent  before  us, — that 
they  have  taken  their  departure  from  us 
in  order  to  precede  us.  We  may  long 
for  tltc7iij  as  we  do  for  those  who  are  ab- 
sent from  us  on  a  voyage,  but  we  may 
not  lament  them  ;  we  may  not  here  below 
clothe  ourselves  in  the  black  garments  of 
mourning,  while  they  are  already  clothed 
in  the  white  garb  of  glory  above  ;  we 
must  not  give  occasion  to  the  heathen  to 
reproach  us  with  our  inconsistency,  be- 
cause we  lament  those  as  annihilated  and 
lost,  whom  we  declare  to  be  living  icith 
God ;  and  because  we  do  not  prove  by 
the  witness  of  our  hearts  the  faith  which 

we  profess  with  our  lips We  who 

live  in  hope,  we  who  believe  in  God  and 
trust  that  Christ  suffered  for  us  and  rose 
again,  we  who  abide  in  Christ,  and  rise 
again  by  Him  and  in  Him,  why  should 
we  ourselves  be  unwilling  to  depart  from 
out  of  the  world,  or  why  should  we  la- 
ment and  sorrow  for  those  among  us  ivho 
are  departed  f  Christ  himself,  our  Lord 
and  God,  exhorts  us,  and  He  says  :  '  I  am 
the  resurrection  and  the  life  ;  whosoever 
believeth  in  me,  though  he  die,  yet  shall 
he  live;  and  he  that  liveth  and  believeth 

in  me,  shall  never  die  !'      Why 

hasten  we  not  to  see  our  country,  to 
salute  our  parents  ?  There  a  vast  multitude 
of  them  that  are  dear  to  us,  await  our  ar- 
rival, a  multitude  of  parents,  brethren,  and 
children,  who  are  now  secure  of  their 
own  salvation,  and  anxious  only  about 
ours.  What  a  mutual  joy  will  it  be  for 
them  and  us,  when  we  come  into  their 
presence  and  receive  their  embrace  !"* 
From  this  turn  of  mind  the  Christian  cus- 
tom arose,  that  the  remembrance  of  the 
dead  should  be  celebrated  on  the  anniver- 
sary of  their  death  by  their  relations,  hus- 
band or  wife,  in  a  manner  suited   to  the 


Cyprian,  de  Mortalitate,  (sub  fincm.) 


214 


NATALITIA   MARTYRUM. 


nature  of  the  Christian  faith  and  hope. 
The  Supper  of  the  Lord  was  celebrated 
on  this  day,*  in  the  consciousness  of  an 
inseparable  communion  with  those  who 
had  died  in  the  Lord  ;  a  gift  was  brought 
to  the  altar  in  their  name,  as  if  they  were 
still  living  members  of  the  Church  ;  and 
it  was  hence,  probably,  that  the  prayer 
for  peace  to  the  souls  of  the  departed  was 
interwoven  with  the  prayer  of  the  Church, 
preceding  the  communion.f 

But  even  this  custom,  which  really  pro- 
ceeded from  a  pure  Christian  feeling,  re- 
ceived a.  false,  unevangelic  turn,  from  its 
connection  with  that  false  notion  of  a  sa- 
crifice in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord.  It  was 
fancied  that  the  magical  efficacy  of  tha 
celebration  of  that  sacrifice  would  con- 
duce to  the  advantage  of  the  departed  per- 
son, although  it  really  entirely  depends 
on  the  dispositions  which  each  man  gives 
proof  of  in  his  life,  whether  that  sacrifice 
of  Christ  shall  be  a  source  of  salvation  to 
him  individually  or  not;  although  the 
efficacy  of  that  sacrifice  of  Christ  can  be 
appropriated  to  no  man  by  the  instrumen- 
tality of  others,  unless  he  has  appropriated 
it  to  himself  by  his  own  lively  faith, — 
and  in  this  case,  no  man  can  impart  more 
to  him,  than  he  himself  has  received  from 
his  life  of  faith.  The  germ  of  this  false 
view  of  things  is  to  be  discerned  as  early 
as  the  time  of  Cyprian, 

As  individual  Christians  and  Christian 
families  celebrated  in  this  manner  the  re- 
membrance of  their  near  relations,  whole 
Churches  also  celebrated  the  remembrance 
of  those  who  had  died  in  the  midst  of 
them  as  witnesses  of  the  faith :  the  day 
of  their  death  was  looked  upon  as  their 
birthday — the  day  of  their  birth  into  a 
glorified  existence.  J  The  remains  of  their 
bodies  were  carefiiUy  buried,  as  the  holy 
organs  of  holy  souls,  which  should  here- 


*  [Tn  the  Books  of  Common  Prayer,  published 
•luring  the  first  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  there 
was  a  separate  offiice  f^r  the  administration  of  the 
sacrament  at  funerals.  It  is  given  in  Sparrow's 
Collection  of  Articles,  Injunctions,  &C.,  p.  199. 
It  is  in  Latin  ;  its  date  is  1560.  It  is  found  in 
some  English  editions  also. — H.  J.  R.] 

I  "  Oblationes  pro  defunctis  annua  die  facimus." 
TertuUian,  de  Corona  Mil.  c.  iii.,  where  it  is  spoken 
of  as  an  old  tradition.  He  also  says  to  a  husband, 
in  regard  to  his  deceased  wife:  "  Procujusspiritu 
postulas,  pro  qua  oblationes  annuas  reddis  :  com- 
mendabis  per  sacerdotem,"  &c.  Dc  Exhortat. 
Castitat.  c.  xi. 

t  The    "dies    natales,    natalitia    martyrum," 


after  come  again  into  their  service,  when 
called  into  another  more  glorious  form. 
There  was  a  congregation  formed  round 
their  graves  on  the  anniversary  of  their 
birthday,  (in  the  sense  mentioned  above,) 
and  the  story  of  their  confession  of  the 
faith  and  of  their  sufferings  was  told,  the 
Lord's  Supper  was  celebrated,  in  the  con- 
viction of  a  continued  communion  with 
them  in  union  with  Him,  of  whom  they 
had  given  witness  by  their  death.*  The 
pure  Christian  character  of  the  commemo- 
rative festival  is  shown  by  the  manner  in 
which  the  Church  of  Smyrna,  in  their 
account  of  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp, 
their  bishop,  answered  the  reproach  of 
the  heathens,  who  were  unwilling  to  give 
up  to  the  Church  the  remains  of  the 
martyr,  in  order  that  the  Christians  might 
not  forsake  their  crucified  Redeemer,  and 
begin  to  worship  the  martyr.  The  Church 
writes  thus  :  "  Ye  know  not  that  we  can 
neither  forsake  that  Christ,  who  suffered 
for  the  salvation  of  the  whole  world  of 
the  redeemed,  nor  can  we  worship  any 
other.  We  pray  to  Him,  but  we  love  the 
martyrs,  as  they  deserve,  for  their  exceed- 
ing love  to  their  King  and  Master ;  and 
as  we  also  hope  to  become  their  compa- 
nions and  fellow  disciples."  The  Church 
then  continues  :  '•'  We  take  up  his  bones, 
which  are  more  precious  to  us  than  gold 
and  precious  stones,  and  we  lay  them 
down  in  a  becoming  place ;  and  God  will 
grant  that  we  may  gather  together  there 
in  peace  and  joy,  and  celebrate  the  birth- 
day of  his  martyrdom,  in  remembrance 
of  the  departed  warrior,  and  for  the  prac- 
tice and  exercise  of  those  whom  the  battle 
still  awaits."  We  cainiot,  however,  deny, 
that  in  the  time  of  Cyprian,  and  even 
earlier  (for  TertuUian,  as  a  Montanist, 
had  already  combated  this  error,)  the 
seeds  of  an  exaggerated  honour  to  the 
martyrs,  which  had  consequences  preju- 
dicial to  the  purity  of  Christianity,  showed 
themselves.  So  inclined  is  man  univer- 
sally to  overvalue  what  is  human,  and  to 
idolize  the  instrument,  which  ought  only 
to  direct  his  heart  to  Him,  who  works  by 
means  of  that  instrument. 


*  These  "  oblationes,  sacrificia  pro  niartyribus," 
originally  presumed  that  the  martyrs  were  like 
other  sinful  men,  who  might  well  need  the  Chris- 
tian intercession  ;  in  its  original  intention,  there- 
fore, this  custom  was  in  contradiction  with  the 
extravagant  reverence  paid  to  martyrs;  and  hence 
it  was  afterwards  found  necessary  to  give  a  new 
meaning  to  this  old  custom. 


THE    TRANSLATOR'S    PREFACE. 


In  presenting  to  the  public  the  second  volume  of  this  translation  of  Dr.  Neander's 
History  of  the  Church,  I  may  be  allowed  to  express  my  regret  that  the  promise  of  its 
speedy  appearance  (made  at  the  publication  of  the  first  volume,)  has  not  been  duly 
realized.  It  would  be  of  little  interest  to  detail  the  causes  of  this  delay,  as  they  are 
chiefly  of  a  personal  character,  if  they  were  not  calculated  to  show  that  some  of  them 
are  unlikely  again  to  operate,  so  as  to  prevent  my  rapid  progress  in  finishing  my  trans- 
lation of  the  succeeding  volumes  of  this  able  work.*  The  circumstances  of  our  own 
country,  at  the  period  of  the  publication  of  the  first  volume,  left  those,  who  took  much 
part,  as  I  did  then,  in  periodical  literature,  but  little  time  or  thought  for  studies  of  a  less 
stirring  character,  and  however  higher  in  value,  of  a  more  remote  interest;  and  the 
same  cause  led  me  to  presume  that  such  a  work  then  would  find  but  few  readers. 
University  employments,  and  many  other  avocations  which  I  had  not  anticipated,  at 
first  took  me  away  from  the  subject,  and  every  one  knows  with  what  difficulty  employ- 
ments once  suspended  are  again  resumed.  About  the  beginning  of  this  year,  however, 
the  pubhshers  having  informed  me  that  the  first  volume  was  out  of  print,  I  determined 
to  finish  the  second  immediately,  part  of  it  having  been  printed  some  years  ago,  and 
the  result  has  been  the  present  publication. 

The  second  volume,  now  published,  completes  the  history  of  the  first  three  centuries, 
and  the  first  portion  of  the  work  is  now  finished.  I  must,  therefore,  take  the  present 
opportunity  of  offering  a  few  remarks,  both  upon  the  original  work  and  on  the  transla- 
tion. With  regard  to  the  former,  I  have  expressed  my  own  opinion  very  fully  in  the 
preface  to  the  first  volume,  and  I  do  not  see  any  thing  there  which  I  should  wish  to 
retract,  nor  is  there  much  which  I  think  it  necessary  to  add.  I  have  the  same  opinion 
of  the  candour  and  integrity  of  the  author ;  and  I  entertain  the  same  dissent  from  some 
of  his  opinions.  The  few  remarks  which  I  would  here  offer,  are  rather  to  be  taken  as 
cautions  to  those  younger  readers,  who  apply  to  these  volumes  for  instruction.  I  would 
suggest  to  them  the  unsatisfactory  nature  of  some  of  its  statements,  and  attempt  to  point 
out  one  of  the  causes  from  which  this  circumstance  proceeds.  With  regard  to  the  whole 
of  the  Church  question,  I  have  spoken  so  fully  in  the  preface  and  the  notes  to  the  first 
volume,  that  I  need  not  touch  upon  it  now.  But  the  great  doctrinal  point,  which  I  thmk 
is  treated  in  an  unsatisfactory  manner,  is  that  of  the  Trinity,  (see  pp.  255,  and  280-90 ;) 
the  most  important  of  all  the  doctrines  of  Christianity. 

The  author  may,  perhaps,  think  it  foreign  to  the  province  of  the  historian,  to  express 
a  decided  opinion  on  doctrinal  points, — a  view  in  which  I  cannot  wholly  coincide.  I 
think  a  perfectly  impartial  statement  of  the  arguments  of  those  who  differ  from  us,  and 
a  perfectly  fair  account  of  their  conduct,  are  quite  compatible,  not  only  with  entertain- 
ing a  decided  opinion  on  such  matters,  but  with  the  expression  of  it.  And  I  confess 
that  it  would  have  given  me  great  satisfaction  to  find  in  Dr.  Neander's  statements  with 
regard  to  the  great  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  something  less  indistinct  and  shadowy,  than 
the  passages  to  which  I  have  here  pointed  attention.  I  think  such  statements  might 
have  been  made,  without  any  fear  of  appearing  to  explain  that  mysterious  dogma.  It 
appears  to  me  a  question  rather  of  fact  than  of  speculation,  as  one  might  attempt  to 

*  Should  no  unforeeeen  obstacles  occur,  I  trust,  in  a  very  short  period,  to  publish  two  more 
volumes,  which  will  contain  the  same  proportion  (three  Bands,  or  Parts)  of  the  original. 

215 


ccxvi  THE  translator's  preface. 

show  in  the  following  manner.  Without  any  presumptuous  attempt  to  explain  to 
ourselves  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  if  we  ask  ourselves  one  or  two  simple  questions, 
we  must  bring  the  matter  to  an  issue  at  once;  viz.  Is  our  Saviour  spoken  of  in  Scrip- 
ture, in  language  inapplicable  to  any  created  Being,  and  at  the  same  time  is  the  idea  of 
the  Father  suffering  on  the  cross  entirely  excluded?  And  again:  is  the  Holy  Spirit 
spoken  of  in  Scripture  in  a  manner  inconsistent  with  any  thing  but  a  clear  objective 
sense?  These  things  belong  to  the  class  of  facts,  rather  than  to  that  of  opinions,  and 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  does  nothing  more  than  enounce  these  facts — the  Athanasian 
creed  itself  contains  no  speculative  explanation  of  them,  and  no  attempt  at  it.  Let  us, 
therefore,  with  this  impression  before  our  minds,  inquire  to  what  the  remarks  of 
Dr.  Neander  are  really  applicable.  I  think  it  will  be  seen  that  they  not  only  admit  a 
construction,  by  which  they  do  not  oppose  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  even  as  laid 
down  in  the  most  precise  manner  in  the  Athanasian  creed;  but  that  they  properly 
apply  to  further  speculative  attempts  to  explain  this  doctrine.  But  still  I  think  they  are 
expressed  in  so  indistinct  a  manner,  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  readers  would  con- 
sider them  as  directed  against  any  positive  declarations  of  the  necessity  of  a  belief  in 
this  doctrine,  as  held  by  the  orthodox ;  and  I  think  the  tendency  of  the  language,  and 
the  manner  in  which  it  is  used,  calculated  rather  to  lower  the  notion  of  the  absolute 
necessity  of  a  right  faith,  even  in  such  essential  points  as  this — a  tendency,  which,  in 
other  hands,  might  be  carried  much  farther,  and  where  the  moderatian  and  Christian 
feelings  of  Dr.  Neander  were  wanting,  might  produce  great  mischief.  We  must  never 
forget  that  the  disciples  of  any  erroneous  system  or  tenet,  always  diverge  more  widely 
from  the  truth  than  their  master.  The  divergency  of  error  is  invariably  a  progressive 
operation. 

I  regret,  therefore,  the  indistinctness,  of  which  I  speak,  both  for  these  reasons,  and 
because  I  think  it  the  province  of  ecclesiastical  history  to  give  witness  to  the  great 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  warning  to  future  generations  from  the  errors  of  those 
•vC^hich  have  passed  away.  The  author,  however,  of  this  work  appears  to  be  chiefly 
solicitous  about  the  improvement  of  the  heart  and  the  affections  of  man  by  Christianity, 
for  which  solicitude  no  one  can  do  otherwise  than  honour  and  respect  him ;  but  at  the 
same  time  it  is  certain,  that  to  effect  this  great  end,  the  maintenance  of  all  the  great 
doctrines  of  Christianity  in  their  integrity  is  absolutely  essential.  Whatever  is  revealed, 
whatever  has  been  universally  maintained  in  the  Christian  Church  from  the  first  ages, 
I  believe  to  be  necessary  to  be  received,  in  order  that  Christianity  may  produce  its  full 
effect  m  the  amelioration  of  man's  nature,  and  that  any  departure  from  them  Avill  soon 
be  felt  in  its  practical  influence. 

The  next  point  to  which  I  would  draw  attention,  is  the  general  view  which  the 
author  takes  of  the  progress  of  Christianity,  in  regard  to  the  formation  of  the  opinion 
of  the  Church  on  great  questions  of  doctrine.  We  can  scarcely  conceive  more  than 
three  ways  in  which  Christian  doctrines  may  be  supposed  to  have  obtained  their 
recognition  in  the  Church  in  express  formulse. 

1.  They  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  explicitly  maintained  in  the  same  words,  and 
with  the  selfsame  limitations  from  the  very  first  ages  of  the  Christian  Church, — a  view 
which  the  amplifications  of  doctrine,  as  exhibited  in  the  history  of  existing  creeds, 
sufficiently  shows  to  be  untenable. 

2.  They  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  held  implicitly,*  and  in  some  degree  only  as 
matters  of  consciousness,  until  the  prevalence  of  opposite  errors  required  this  conscious- 
ness to  be  embodied  in  definite  terms,  and  expressed  in  public  formulae ; — or 

3.  We  may  suppose  that  all  doctrines  were  in  a  mere  chaotic  state  till  controversies 
arose,  and  then  that  the  doctrines  were  actually  formed  during  the  controversies,  and 
new  doctrines  were  thus,  as  it  were,  thought  out  and  made  by  these  controversies. 

*  Thus  a  bclirf  in  the  Trinity  implied  a  belief  in  the  eternity  of  the  Son,  &c.  We  must 
rememlier,  however,  that  the  shorter  confessions  of  faith  (for  liaptism,  &c.)  are  summaries,  which 
vouched  for  more  than  they  eApressed.    See  Bull,  Judicium  Eccl.  Cath.  cap.  iv. 


THE   translator's   PREFACE.  CCXVll 

Of  these  views  the  second  appears  to  me  the  most  consistent  with  history,  and  the 
third  appears  to  be  that  which  I  should  derive  as  my  impression  from  reading  tliis 
work.  It  may  not  he  the  opinion  of  the  author,  and  he  might  probably  disavow  it.  if 
placed  thus  before  him;  but  still  I  think  jt  is  the  impression,  which  would  generally  be 
entertained  by  most  of  his  readers.  I  am  not  about  to  argue  the  question  here,  as  that 
would,  of  itself,  require  a  volume.*  I  only  point  out  the  difference  between  these  two 
positions,  and  request  the  readers  of  ecclesiastical  history  to  bear  it  in  mind,  and  judge 
for  themselves.  I  should  deeply  regret  it,  if  in  any  way  I  have  misrepresented  the 
view  of  my  author.  I  only  state  that  this  is  the  impression  left  upon  my  mind  by  close 
attention  to  his  work.  • 

The  last  point  to  which  I  would  draw  attention  is  the  manner  in  which  the  views 
which  Dr.  Neander  has  embraced,  appear  sometimes  to  influence  the  judgment  he 
forms  on  points  only  incidentally  connected  Avith  them.  His  aim,  indeed,  is  to  be  per- 
fectly impartial  and  unprejudiced,^ — an  aim  which,  we  know,  it  is  almost  impossible  for 
any  man  entirely  to  attain;  and,  therefore,  we  may  not  wonder  if  sometimes  we  see, 
in  his  case,  preconceived  opinions  affecting  his  decisions.  The  point,  to  which  I  more 
particularly  allude,  is  the  judgment  he  passes  on  the  genuineness  and  integrity  of  some 
of  the  most  remarkable  remains  of  Christian  antiquity.  As  a  single  example,  I  would 
only  mention  the  decision  of  Dr.  Neander,  that  ^  40  of  the  Epistle  of  Clement,  of 
Rome  is  an  interpolation.  The  learned  and  amiable  author  of  this  work  believes,  that 
the  transference  of  Jewish  terms  to  the  Christian  priesthood  is  of  later  date'than  the  time 
of  Clement  of  Rome,  and  accordingly  decides  that  this  must  be  an  interpolation.  He 
alleges,  indeed,  that  it  contradicts  the  rest  of  the  Epistle;  but  this  term  appears  to  me 
too  strong  to  apply  to  the  case  in  question.  To  a  person  who  had  not  formed  so  strong 
an  opinion  on  this  subject  as  Dr.  Neander,  such  a  contradiction  would  hardly  appear 
to  exist.  No  doubt,  whenever  so  learned  and  candid  a  writer  as  Dr.  Neander  has 
arrived  at  an  opinion,  hke  that  to  which  I  have  adverted,  every  passage,  which  appears 
to  militate  against  it,  challenges  an  inquiry,  at  least  from  him,  into  its  genuineness ;  but 
such  an  opinion  is  no  argument  against  its  genuineness  in  the  minds  of  others,  whose 
opinions  differ  on  that  very  point;  and  it  is  hardly  a  just  method  of  proceeding  on  this 
sole  ground  to  refuse  the  testimony  of  one  of  the  witnesses  before  the  controversy  is 
decided.f  I  think  in  these  respects  there  is  a  degree  of  caution  required  in  admitting 
some  of  the  conclusions  of  this  work;  and  my  conviction  of  the  necessity  of  such 
caution  probably  may  originate,  and  is  certainly  strengthened  by  the  circumstance,  that 
on  many  points  our  views  do  not  coincide. 

These  are  the  principal  circumstances  which  I  would  point  out  as  likely  to  prevent 
this  work  from  being  as  generally  acceptable  and  useful  in  this  country,  as  its  great 
merit  in  other  respects  would  lead  us  to  expect  that  it  might  become.:]:  I  trust  that,  in 
expressing  my  opinion  on  these  points,  I  have  been  betrayed  into  no  presumption,  and 
shown  no  disrespect  to  the  author,  whose  work  I  have  translated,  and  also  that  I  have 

*  I  would  only  suffffest  to  my  younjrer  readers  one  or  two  works  on  the  great  doctriiio  of  the 
Trinity,  from  which  ihey  will  denve  great  advantage.  I  mean  the  works  of  Bp.  Ilorsley,  Dr. 
Waterland,  Bp.  Bull,  and  as  a  very  convenient  and  useful  work  of  reference,  Dr.  Burton's 
"  Testimonies  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers."  . 

t  Of  course  these  remarks*  are  not  meant  to  apply  to  clear  cases  of  anachronisms,  which  are 
often  of  service  in  detecting  forgeries.  Take  for  example  the  will  of  St.  Patrick  which  mentions 
Indulgences.     Which  word  was  not  in  upc  for  centuries  after  his  death. 

I  I  might,  perhaps,  justly  appeal  in  this  point  to  the  almost  unanimous  opinion  of  those  writers 
in  whose  works  I  have  seen  any  notice  of  those  of  Dr.  Neander.  All  bear  testimony  to  the 
excellence  of  the  author,  but  all  with  a  reserve  on  some  point.  They  all  e.xpress  their  unfeigned 
respect  for  ilie  learning  of  the  author,  his  excellent  qualities  of  head  and  heart,  as  well  a.s  the 
general  usefulness  of  his  works,  hut  all  qualify  it  by  expressing  a  dissent  from  some  of  his  views. 
See,  for  instance,  tiie  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  preface  to  his  work  on  Tertullian,  where  he  controverts 
many  of  Dr.  Neander's  statements  and  opinions;  or  Dr.  Burton's  introduction  to  his  Bampton 
Lectures,  where,  in  speaking  of  this  very  history,  and  expressing  a  hope  that  it  would  be  translated, 
he  adds,  "  'I'he  writer  is  a  theorist,  as  are  many  of  his  countrymen ;  and  I  could  wish  that  some 
of  his  observatic)ns  had  not  been  made.  But  he  has  investigated  with  groat  patience  of  research, 
and  with  a  very  original  train  of  thought,  the  early  history  of  the  Church;  and  if  he  carries  into 
execution  what  he  has  partly  promised  to  undertake,  a  full  and  special  history  of  the  Church  in 
the  time  of  the  apostles,  he  will  probably  confer  a  lasting  benefit  on  literature  in  general."  p.  xvii. 

28  T 


ccxviii  THE  translator's  preface. 

not  stepped  beyond  the  proper  province  of  a  translator.  It  might  be  supposed  that  I 
coincided  in  all  the  views  here  maintained,  if  I  intimated  nothing  to  the  contrary ;  and 
as  I  think  some  of  them  unsound,  I  should  feel  that  I  was  thus  far  promoting  erroneous 
opinions.  But  havuig  pointed  out  what  appear  to  me,  after  paying  considerable 
attention  to  the  work,  the  sources  of  its  chief  faults,  I  leave  my  readers  to  exercise 
their  own  judgment  on  the  subject,  and  to  derive  all  the  advantage  and  instruction  from 
this  history,  which,  in  most  respects,  it  is  calculated  to  bestow. 

"\\^ith  regard  to  the  translation  itself,  I  must,  as  I  before  observed,  leave  others  to 
judge  of  the  manner  in  which  my  humble  task  has  been  performed.  I  remain  of  the 
same  opinion  still  as  to  the  duty  of  a  translator.  In  works  of  this  nature  fidelity  is  his 
first  merit,  and  ought  to  be  his  chief  aim  ;  and  for  this  reason,  I  think  Ave  ought  very 
rarely  to  resort  to  a  paraphrastic  version.* 

The  style  of  this  work  in  general  is  not  such  as  to  render  it  particularly  easy  to  bring 
into  English,  with  fluency  and  freedom ;  but  this  difficulty  is,  of  course,  very  much 
increased,  when  the  subjects  of  which  it  treats  approach  the  subtil  regions  of  meta- 
physics. A  large  portion  of  this  volume,  it  will  be  seen,  is  devoted  to  a  development 
of  the  various  systems  of  Gnosticism,  and  to  an  explanation  of  the  views  of  Manes 
and  his  followers.  Oriental  mysticism  and  theosophy  has  long  been  noted  as  full  of 
obscurity  5  and  even  the  acute  and  learned  Bayle  has  not  hesitated  to  express  his  utter 
inability  to  enter  into  it.  After  speaking,  in  his  article  on  Zerdusht,  or  Zoroaster,  of 
the  Persian  notions  of  light  and  darkness,  he  adds,  "This  chaos  of  thought  is  incom- 
prehensible to  us  western  people.  None  but  the  eastern  nations,  accustomed  to  a 
mystical  and  contradictory  language,  can  bear  such  excessive  nonsense  without  disgust 
and  horror."  This  is  too  sweeping  a  position,  and  too  strong  language;  much  "has 
been  done  since  his  days  to  introduce  us  to  a  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  ideas 
of  the  eastern  nations,  but  still  this  difference  in  the  habits  of  thought  between  these 
two  families  of  the  human  race,  will  always  tend  to  make  the  speculative  views  of  the 
one  difficult  to  the  other.  Dr.  Neander  has  done  much  to  arrange  and  systematize  the 
various  theories  of  Gnosticism ;  but  their  obscurities  have  not  been  entirely  removed, 
nor  are  they  in  all  cases  lessened  by  a  passage  through  the  regions  of  German  meta- 
physics. There  is  one  difficulty,  however,  which  no  one  can  properly  appreciate, 
except  those  who  have  known  it  by  experience,  in  every  attempt  to  present  the 
metaphysical  and  philosophical  speculations  of  German  Avriters  to  English  readers- 
and  that  difficulty  arises  from  the  copiousness  of  the  German  metaphysical  vocabulary, 
and  the  poverty  of  our  own. 

Without  passing  any  judgment  on  the  various  systems  of  philosophy  which  have 
made  their  appearance  in  Germany  within  the  last  fifty  years,  we  may  say  that  the 
Germans  have  paid  more  attention  to  metaphysics  latterly  than  our  countrymen  have 
done ;  and,  whether  these  systems  be  true  or  false,  they  have  certainly  carried  to  a  very 
high  point  of  refinement  their  analysis  of  the  subtle  processes  of  thought  within  us. 
In  reducing  their  analysis  to  systems,  they  have  made  minute  distinctions  between 
these  processes,  which  they  have  been  enabled  to  embody  in  their  language,  and  thus 
to  introduce  a  definiteness  into  their  copious  vocabulary,  of  which  our  own  language  is 
hardly  capable.  And  besides  this,  the  lax  manner  in  which  all  words  in  English, 
referring  to  mental  processes  f  are  used,  renders  it  impossible  to  represent  such  dis- 
tinctions inteUigibly,  without  expressly  defining  beforehand  in  what  sense  Ave  mean  to 
use  the  words.     Conception^  thought,  idea,  notion,  perception,  apprehension,  and  other 


I  am  fully  aware  that  a  different  principle  has  been  maintained,  and  that  some  translators  from 

Smc^W  "      .''rf  P'^^r'"^  '«  f^T  »h<^"- »»"'">•'«  ^'■'-nse  raiher  than  his  words;  and  have  ihou^lu 

n™Jin<;  i-"'!    ll    ,  '"  ''''^T^''  ^'"^  ""^r  °"""'""  ^'h°'''  passages.     It  must  be  obvious  that  this 

S  is  always  dcJi^a'bie"^    ^"^'"'''         "  "''"  "^^'''  '*'^'^^^'''  "»^  "'>"d  ""^l  «pi"i<^"«  «*'  ^'^e  author  ; 

+  The  same  is  true  in -some  degree  in  respect  to  our  mental.faeuliies  also. 

.„!,«„  I     """"'"""'  '"  ^18  Prodromus  (more  particularly  mentioned  in  the  next  note)  has,  how- 

fin  ^h  "^^     nhn.'l"  '"''''^  ""V"-  ^  "T  ^'^""'  "'"  ""^  '^^''^  ''■''"^'-     "«  ^^ems  rather  inclined  to 
banish  idea  altogether,  and  substitute  for  u  im«-e  or  perception.    He  says,  "  an  idea  must  either  be 


THE    translator's    PREFACE.  CCXIX 

words  are  used  synonymously,  which  might  be  devoted  to  different  processes,  and  the 
very  distinction  of  the  Reason  and  the  Understanding,  on  Avhich  so  much  stress  is  laid 
in  Germany,  is  seldom  brought  forward  in  English  works.*  These  circumstances 
make  it  difficult  adequately  to  represent  in  any  English  translation  the  exact  views  of 
the  author  in  those  passages,  where  any  words  occur,  which  presuppose  a  recognition 
of  the  distinctions  common  among  his  countrymen.     I  have  endeavoured  to  grapple 

the  equivalent  of  a  perception,  or  a  conception  ;  and  these  two  words  are  merely  abstractions,  that 
could  have  no  sense,  if  we  did  not  refer  them  respectively  to  tlie  only  assertion  any  of  us  can 
truly  make;  namely,  I  perceive  Things,  and  I  conceive  Stales,"  p.  20J.  It  must  be  remembered 
that' Sir  G.  Haughton's  fundamental  principle  is  this.  Every  word  necessarily  means  nothing  more 
than  THixG  or  state,  "  and  even  the  last  of  these  two  terms  is  a  mere  sound — a  symbol  boldly 
invented  by  the  intellect,  for  the  purpose  of  reasoning,"  p.  5.  He  says  also,  p.  45,  "that  all 
reasoning  is  effected  solely  by  means  of  words,  either  single  or  linked  together  in  those  chains 
which  we  call  Conceptions",  but  ko  sini^le  word,  State  even  not  excepted,  can  be  a  conception  in 
any  other  sense  than  as  a  sound  preserved  by  the  memory."  To  the  class  of  Perceptions  according 
to  him  belong  all  objects  we  perceive  when  we  see,  hear,  smell,  taste,  or  touch.  To  Conceptions 
belong  all  the  Combinations,  Relations  and  other  States,  of  the  objects  or  things  we  perceive,  and 
of  which  we  are  enabled  to  think  or  conceive  by  the  mysterious  operations  of  the  intellect,  aided 
by  the  almost  equally  mysterious  mechanism  of  language  which  it  had  previously  prepared  hy  and 
for  the  process,  to  which  we  give  the  name  of  thought.  To  this  class  must  likewise  be  referred 
those  essences  which  we  derive  by  strict  infeiencewhen  we  observe  the  design,  harmony,  and 
operations  of  nature,  such  as  God,  Soul,  and  Power." 

This  is  detinite  enough,  and  this  author  will  perform  a  service  to  our  language  and  to  our  habits 
of  thinking,  it  we  can  persuade  ail  writers  to  be  more  precise  in  the  use  of  such  terms,  whether 
they  adopt  his  definitions  or  not. 

But  let  not  my  meaning  be  misunderstood.  I  do  not  here  pretend  to  give  any  judgment  either 
about  the  German  systems  or  Sir  G.  Haughton's  book.  I  only  point  out  the  existence  of  certain 
refinements  of  speculation  among  our  German  neighbours,  which  our  language  scarcely  enables 
to  present  in  the  symbols  which  it  affords  us.  In  professedly  metaphysical  works,  the  difficulty 
may,  perhaps,  be  obviated  by  definitions,  but  where  these  words  only  occur  incidentally,  as  in  this 
history,  the  difficulty  introduced  by  this  consideration  is  not  slight.  The  cause,  perhaps,  lies  deeper, 
and  this  has  been  most  ably  touched  upon  by  one,  whose  memory  I  revere,  whose  guidance  I 
daily  miss,  and  whose  correcting  hand  would  have  rendered  these  pages  far  more  worthy  of  con- 
sideration ;  and  it  would  be  injustice  not  to  quote  his  words: — 

"  The  English  are  not  a  thinking  and  speculative,  but  a  practical  people,  and  they  are  accus- 
tomed to  look  at  things  only  in  a  practical  point  of  view.  This  habit  is  carried  into  their  literature, 
and  he  who  wishes  to  gain  their  attention  must  not  deal  in  abstractions,  or  he  will  write  in  vain. 
'I'hings  must  be  presented  in  a  definite  tangible  form,  or  the  English  capacity  cannot  receive  them. 
It  may  be  a  very  good  or  a  very  bad  stale  of  the  intellect;  oti  that  point  I  say  nothing;  but  I 
maintain  that  this  is  the  state  of  English  intellect,  and  this  will  sufficiently  account  for  the  neglect 
experienced  by  many  valuable  works  of  latter  days." — The  State  of  Protestantism  in  Germany, 
by  the  late  Hugh  James  Rose,  p.  208. 

*  To  this  sweeping  remark  there  are  of  course  some  exceptions,  and  among  these  it  would  be 
wrong  to  omit  mentioning  the  late  Mr.  Coleridge's  admirable  little  volume,  entitled  "  Aids  to 
Reflection."  I  may  also  add  that  Sir  G.  Haughion  in  his  Prodromus  has  distinguished  between 
Reason  and  Uiiderstandifig,  but  not  exactly  in  the  same  manner  as  the  German  metaphysicians. 
Of  the  understanding  he  says,  "  The  first  great  delusion  we  are  under,  is  in  supposing  that  ihe 
word  Understanding  represents  any  thing  whatsoever.  We,  that  is,  our  thinking  selves,  may 
understand  what  we  hear  or  see;  but  when  we  employ  the  Abstract  word  Understanding  for  some 
part  of  ourselves,  we  do  so  clearly  by  a  fallacy.  When  we  understand  any  thing,  we  necessarily 
feel,  are  conscious,  and  intelligent;  and  were  I  to  analyse  the  term  Understanding,  according  to 
the  usual  mode  in  these  cases,  I  would  consequently  say,  that  it  is  compounded  ol  Feeling, 
Consciousness,  and  Intelligence.  For,  if  I  analyse  one  Abstraction,  I  shall  most  likely  do  it  by 
the  help  of  others;  but  in  reality  there  is  neither  Understanding,  Feeling,  Consciousness,  nor 
Intelligence;  and  instead  of  these,  we  must  remember  that  it  is  the  union  of  soul  with  matter, 
which,  being  organized  into  human  frames,  understands,  feels,  is  conscious  and  intelligent."  Of 
the  Reason,  on  the  contrary,  he  says,  "  Of  all  the  divisions  into  which  we  separate  '  the  Mind,' 
Reason  is  the  only  one  which  is  not  a  misconception  arising  from  the  delusive  nature  of  language. 
It  is  not  a  faculty,  but  a  real  agent,  aiding  and  assisting  the  intellect  of  man  in  all  its  varied  opera- 
tions." The  view  which  Sir  (i.  Haughton  develops  is  briefly  explained  thus:  "  Intellect,"  (that 
which  thinks.)  "  Sensorium"  (that  portion  of  the  brain  which  is  conscious,)  and  Nerves,"  (the 
seat  of  sensation,)  "  constitute  the  mysterious  agent  called  Self;"  and  he  elsewhere  says  of  the 
Intellect,  "  It  is  this  unknown  organ  so  highly  endowed,  and  constituting  the  thinking,  reflecting 
agent,  resulting  from  the  combination  of  soul  with  matter  duly  organized,  that  I  call  in  these  pages 
by  the  name  of  Intellect."  The  author  immediately  after  the  above  assertion  about  Reason  as 
an  Agent,  not  si  faculty,  begs  his  readers  to  suspend  their  judgment  on  the  point  till  he  has 
devel(»ped  his  vi^ws  in  some  future  work. 

It  would  be  altogether  foreign  to  the  subject  of  these  volumes  to  enter  at  any  length  into  meta- 
physical disquisitions,  but  in  noticing  )he  difficulty  which  arises  to  the  English  translator  of  a 
Gernjan  work,  from  the  difference  in  the  mental  condition  of  the  two  nations,  it  is  rot,  perhaps, 
altogether  out  of  place  to  allude  to  an  English  work  on  the  subject  of  Metaphysics,  written  with 
considerable  clearness  and  ability,  which  proposes  to  throw  a  new  light  on  all  the  phenomena  of 
our  minds,  and  to  show  that  all  metaphysical  systems  have  hitherto  been  founded  on  delusions, 
arising  from  our  mistaking  the  nature  and  force  of  the  words  we  use.  That  the  work  deserves 
serious,  and  impartial  consideration,  as  a  remarkable  exposition  of  Nominalism  given  in  a  sys- 
tematic form,  and  applied  ia  a  novel  manner,  few  persons  would  be  inclined  to  deny;  but  whether 


CCXX  THE  TRANSLATOR  S  PREFACE. 

with  this  difficulty  as  well  as  I  was  able;  but  in  order  that  I  might  apprize  the  reader 
that  there  was  something,  which  could  not  be  rendered  by  a  word  exactly  synonymous 
with  the  original,  I  have  occasionally  inserted  the  German  word,  and  sometimes  referred 
to  the  preface  for  some  observations  on  the  subject.  This  is  particularly  the  case  with 
such  words  as  .inschmamg,  Begriff,  Bewusstseyn,  &.c. ;  and  I  have  thought  that  it  might 
be  advantageous  to  the  English  reader,  if,  at  the  end  of  this  Preface,  I  threw  into  the 
form  of  a  brief  vocabulary  a  few  remarks  on  such  words,  and  a  translation  of  a  few 
passages  from  German  philosophical  works,  in  which  they  are  expressly  defined.  To 
this  I  will,  therefore,  refer  those  readers  who  require  further  satisfaction  on  this  point. 

It  will  be  seen  that  in  some  passages,  where  I  have  thought  a  literal  translation 
might  appear  obscure  or  ambiguous,  I  have  given  a  paraphrase  in  a  note,  or  vice 
versa,  in  order  that  I  may  not  appear  to  evade  a  difficulty  in  this  manner.  There 
is,  however,  one  passage  in  which,  if  there  is  no  incorrectness  in  the  text,  I  have 
left  it  without  any  attempt  lo  explain  its  meaning,  which  is  certainly  obscure.  It 
may,  perhaps,  be  right  to  state  the  sense  I  deduce  from  it.  It  appears  to  express 
a  notion  of  Origen,  in  which  he  intimates  that  the  word  of  God,  through  which 
the  Logos  communicates  himself  to  the  soul  of  man,  is  called  the  flesh  and  blood  of 
Christ,  and  is  also  the  heavenly  bread,  (symbolized  under  the  sacramental  bread,)  of 
which  we  must  eat  in  order  to  live  forever;  and  that  the  breaking  of  the  bread,  and 
pouring  out  of  the  wine,  are  symbols  of  the  multiplication  of  the  words,  by  which  it  is 
made  effectual  to  the  heart  of  each  individual  believer.  This  I  believe  to  be  the  general 
purport  of  the  sentence,  although  there  is  an  awkwardness  about  the  construction  of  it 
in  the  original  which  I  cannot  entirely  clear  away,  and  I  have  accordingly  left  only  an 
exact  and  literal  translation  of  it.  Had  I  been  able  to  consult  the  passages  of  Origen, 
on  which  the  statement  is  founded,  I  might  have  been  able  to  remove  all  difficulty;  but 
the  references  did  not  enable  me  to  do  this.  The  only  edition  of  Origen  which  I  possess 
is  that  of  Huet;  and  in  this  place  Neander  does  not  refer  to  that  edition,  nor  does  he 
give  means  by  which  it  may  be  traced  in  that  edition. 

With  regard  to  the  quotations  generally  from  Greek  and  Latin  Fathers,  I  have 
followed  the  same  course  as  in  the  first  volume.  I  have  verified  them  whenever  I  was 
able,  and  have  generally  enabled  my  readers  to  do  so  with  much  greater  ease  than 

the  author  establishes  his  views,  I  do  not  undertake  to  decide.  I  think,  however,  in  some  instances, 
our  author's  Nominalism  carries  him  too  far.  When  he  speaks  of  our  attachment  to  the  Church, 
the  State,  the  Constitution,  a  principle,  &:,c.,as  showing  the  '  hold  which  Abstractions  have  upon 
our  nature,'  and  '  hosv  much  we  are  swayed  by  mere  words;'  when  he  observes, — that  '  not  one 
of  these  designate  any  thing  that  has  a  real  existence,  except  as  a  sound:  still  we  are  ready  to 

sacrifice  our  lives  for  them Without  language,  not  one  of  these  conceptions  could  have 

had  an  existence;  nor  could  one  drop  of  the  torrents  of  blood  that  have  flowed  from  such  causes 
have  been  shed,' — is  not  the  author  carried  away  by  his  own  theory?  We  can  hardly  reaso!i  on 
what  we  should  be  "  without  language  ;"  but  it  can  scarcely  be  said  that  we  are  ready  to  sacrifice 
our  lives  in  these  cases  lor  mere  abstractions.  Had  the  author  here  used  his  usual  clearness  and 
acuteness,  would  he  not  have  seen  that  if  these  words  are  mere  abstractions,  they  are  only  conve- 
nient symbols  (abridging  as  symbols  do  the  processes  of  reasoning,)  which  stand  for  matters  which 
exert  a  very  practical  influence  on  men's  happiness?  When  we  say  a  man  is  ready  to  sacrifice  his 
life  for  the  Constitution,  what  do  we  mean  but  that  he  is  ready  lo  resist  changes  in  all  the  relations 
of  life,  which  he  considers  likely  to  bring  misery  on  himself  and  all  around  him.  Let  us  take 
another  instance  to  make  this  clearer.  The  words  Slavery  and  Freedom  express  mere  abstractions, 
exactly  as  much  as  the  words  cited  by  Sir  G.  Haughton;  but  would  the  resistance  to  the  one,  and 
the  struggle  for  the  other,  appear  to  him  to  be  a  struggle  about  a  mere  abstraction?  In  these  cases 
men  contend  about  changes  of  condition  involving  practical  consequences  to  themselves,  and  it  is 
in  vain,  in  order  to  persuade  them  to  lay  aside  their  differences,  to  tell  them  that  the  watchwords 
of  their  cause  arc  mere  abstractions.  And  tlie  same  reasoning  is  applicable,  mutatis  mutandis,  to 
the  instances  selected  by  Sir  G.  Haughton.  With  regard  to  '  the  Church,'  to  those  who  believe 
that  our  Saviour  hound  men  together  under  certain  laws,  to  contend  for  the  welfare  and  extension 
of  the  society,  comprising  all  who  embrace  those  laws,  must  be  a  duty.  The  term  niay'be  an 
abstract  term,  but  it  comprehends  truths  and  realities,  for  which  men  are  bound  to  contend,  though 
they  cannot  be  justified  in  using  persecution  for  the  sake  rtf  them.  Men  talk  about  these  abstrac- 
tions, but  they  contend  about  realities,  included  among  the  complicated  notions,  of  the  aggregate 
of  which  these  abstractions  are  the  conventional  symbol.  I  trust  in  making  these  observations  I 
have  not  misrepresented,  nor  mistaken  this  author,  for  although  he  appears  to  despair  of  a  fair 
hearing  in  England,  and  looks  for  it  to  the  truth-inquiring  spirit  of  Germany,  I  can  say  that  I 
opened  his  essay  with  perfect  impartiality,  and  shall  look  with  much  interest  to  any  further 
development  of  his  views. 


THE    TRANSLATOR'S    PREFACE.  CCXXl 

myself,  by  referring  to  other  editions.  This  is  particularly  the  case  with  the  very 
numerous  quotations  from  Clemens  Alexandrinus.  Tlie  edition  to  which  Dr.  Neander 
refers  is  almost  invariably  the  edition  of  Paris,  1G"29;  and  unfortunately  it  happens  to 
be  the  most  inconvenient  one  possible  for  those  who  possess  any  other.  There  are  no 
divisions  in  it,  but  that  of  pages,  and  these  pages  are  not  marked  in  other  editions.  The 
pages  of  Sylburg's  and  Potter's  editions  are  marked  in  that  of  Klotz,  (Leipsic,  1831 :) 
and  I  have  in  almost  every  instance  given  the  reference  to  each  of  these.  The  books  of 
Clemens  Alexandrinus  are  of  very  considerable  length,  and  a  reference  to  the  page  of 
the  Paris  edition  is  of  no  value  except  to  those  who  possess  that  particular  edition.  I 
have  not  always  given  the  reference  to  Klotz;  but  the  pages  of  Potter  and  Sylbui-g 
being  found  in  the  margin  of  that  edition,  it  is  by  no  means  necessary. 

I  now  proceed  to  give  a  list  of  such  words  as  may  be  productive  of  some  obscurity 
or  difficulty,  with  an  explanation  of  them  from  German  works  of  authority,  especially 
the  Philosophical  Lexicon  of  Krug.*  I  insert  also  a  few  words,  of  which  Dr.  Neander 
makes  frequent  use,  and  respecting  which  some  brief  remarks  may  be  acceptable. 

"  Anschiuung  (intuitio,)  in  its  most  restricted  sense,  is  synonymous  with  an  image 
presented-to-us-through-the-sight,t  from  the  verb  schauen,  to  see.  But  because  the 
representations  of-the-sight  [Gesichtsvorstellungen]  have  the  greatest  clearness  and 
objectivity  of  all  our  sensuous  perceptions,  under  the  term  Jlnscluniung,  taken  in  a  more 
extended  sense,  we  understand  generally  an  objective  representation  to  any  of  our 
senses,  and  contrast  with  it  an  Empjindung,  or  sensatioti  [sensatio,]  as  a  subjective, 
sensuous  representation.  This  contrast  is,  however,  not  to  be  understood  exclusively, 
but  only  as  the  predominant  distinction.  In  the  case  of  an  Anseliauung,  the  Objective 
(the  condition  of  the  object  represented)  comes  most  strongly  into  consciousness ;  in  an 
Einpfinduag,  or  sensation,  the  Subjective,  (the  condition  of  the  subject  in  which  the 
representation  takes  place.)  In  its  widest  meaning,  Aiischaimng  is  equivalent  to  a 
sensuous  representation.:}:  Hence,  sensuous  knowledge^  is  called  anscliauliche,  or 
intuitive. 

"  Pure  or  a  priori  intuitions  [Anchauungen]  are  those  which  are  referred  to  space 
and  time  generally,  and  to  that  which  can  be  constructed  therein  independently  of  expe- 
rience (purely  mathematical  magnitudes;)  empirical,  or  a  posteriori  intuitions,  are  those 
which  are  referred  to  objects  of  experience,  perceivable  in  space  and  time.  An  intel- 
lectual Anschauung  is  one  which  proceeds  from  the  Understanding;  a  rational  one,  that 
which  proceeds  from  the  Reason. 

"  As  soon  as  we  distinguish  the  Reason  and  the  Understanding  from  Sense,  it  be- 
comes inconsistent  to  speak  of  perceiving  intuitively  [anschauen]  as  an  act  of  the  senses, 
and  at  the  same  time  as  an  act  of  the  Reason  or  of  the  Understanding.  But  still  it  may 
be  said  that  the  imagination  performs  this  act  [anschauet,]  because  it  is  itself  nothing 
but  an  inward  sense.  But  the  Sense  itself  is  called  also  the  Anschauungsvermogen,  or 
faculty-of-intuition  (facullas  intuendi.)  The  Anschauungsweise\\  [or  mode  of  intuition] — 

*  All^emeines  Handworterbuch  der  philosophischen  Wissenschaften,  nebst  ihrer  Liieratur  und 
GeschicTite.  Nach  dem  heutigen  Standpuncte  der  Wissenschaft  bearbeitet  und  herausgegeben 
von  D.  Wilhelm  Traugott  Krug,  Professor  der  Philosophie  an  der  Universitat  zu  Leipzig,  &c. 
Zweite  verbesserte  und  vermehrte  Auflage.  Vier  Bande.  Leipzig,  1832.  Fiinfter  Band,  ala 
Supplement  zur  zweiten  Auflage.     Leipzig,  1838. 

t  The  original  word  is  Gesichts-vorstellung,  representation-of-the-sight.  Object  of  sight  would 
not  be  a  just  translation,  as  this  would  leave  out  the  notion  of  the  subject  in  whom  the  represen- 
tation is  formed.  Of  Vorstellu?ig,  Krug  says  (sub  voce,)  Vorstellung  (repraesentatio,)  is  properly 
an  outward  operation  through  which  we  set  any  thing  before  ourselves,  or  before  others  ;  on  which 
account  this  word  is  also  used  when  any  one  at  court,  or  in  society,  allows  himself  to  be  presented 
to  others,  to  personal  acquaintance.  But  since  "with  that  outward  act  [Thaiigkeit.  act,  agency,] 
there  is  always  conjoined  an  inward  one  also,  by  which  something  is  made  present  to  our  con- 
sciousness;  this  making-present  to  us  is  also  called  a  vorsleUen,  [or  setting  before  us,]  and  the 
inward  effect  is  called  a  Vorstellung,  [or  representation.]  And  every  [Vorstellung]  representation 
is  a  more  or  less  clear  and  striking  image  of  something,  which  is  the  circumstance  or  the  object 
of  the  representation,  as  the  ego  is  the  subject  of  it. 

X  Perhaps  impression  would  give  the  best  translation  of  this  word. 

^  Sinnliche  Erkenntniss,  a  cognition  obtained  through  the  senses.  See  the  word  Erkenntniss, 
further  on  in  this  preface. 

II  This  expression  is  used,  rather  more  laxly  by  Neander,  p.  242     See  note.] 

t2 


ccxxii  THE  translator's  preface. 

the  forma    iiituitionis,   on  which    account   the  word  .Anschtninngsform  is  sometimes 

used is   nothing  but  the  law,  according  to  which  our  Sense  performs  the   act  of 

intuition 

"  Anschauungs-  or  Intuitiones-Philosophie  is  opposed  by  many  to  Verstandes-  or 
Reflexions-Philosophie,  and  they  prefer  the  former  to  the  latter.  But  they  ought  pro- 
perly to  be  taken  together,  because  the  ideas  derived  from  intuition,  [Anschauungen] 
and  from  reflection  [or  Begriffe,  see  the  next  word]  are  the  elements  of  all  human 
knowledge." — Krug's  Lexicon,  vol.  i.  p.  160-1. 

To  this  extract  from  Krug,  I  may  append  the  following  from  Kiesewetter's  Logik 
zum  Gebrauch  fur  Schulen,  Vienna,  1824: 

"  All  thoiiglits  are  representations,  but  all  representations  are  not  thoughts.  All  repre- 
sentations must  present  something;  this  something  which  they  present  (which  does 
not,  however,  on  that  account  require  to  have  a  real  existence)  is  called  their  object  [or 
Gegenstand.]  Now  that  representation  which  refers  itself  to  a  single  object,  and  that, 
too,  immediately,  (without  any  intermediate  representation)  is  called  an  Anschauung 
[or  Intuition.]  All  representations,  which  are  not  [Anschauungen  or]  Intuitions,  and 
also  all  representations  which  are  referred  to  more  than  one  object,  as  also  all  mediate 
representations,  are  thoughts.  The  representation  [or  image  in  the  mind,]  which  I  have 
of  the  picture  of  my  friend,  which  is  hanging  before  me,  and  Avhich  I  look  upon ;  the 
representation  I  have  of  the  tones  of  a  violin,  which  I  am  actually  listening  to;  the 
representation  which  I  have  of  the  flower  I  am  smelling,  the  tea  I  am  tasting,  or  of  the 
pain  of  burning,  which  I  feel  at  the  moment;  the  representation  of  the  late  king,  which 
my  imagination  recalls  into  consciousness;  or  the  image  of  a  mountain  stream  pre- 
sented to  my  fancy ;  the  representation  of  the  present  condition  in  which  my  mind 
actually  is — all  these  are  intuitions  [Anschauungen,]  because  they  refer  to  07ie  object, 
and  we  see  at  once  that  this  reference  is  immediate,  and  that  they  do  not  require  any 
intermediate  representation.  The  representations  of  Man,  Flower,  &,c.,  are  not  intui- 
tions, for  they  do  not  refer  to  one  object,  but  comprehend  many ;  and  still  further,  they 
do  not  refer  immediately  to  an  object,  but  do  so  by  means  of  intuitions  (the  representa- 
tion, Man,  for  instance,  is  referred  first  to  the  intuition  of  individual  men,  as  Caius, 
Titus,  &,c.)  and  hence  are  thoughts  (Gedanken.)  Dr.  Kiesewetter  then  proceeds  to  show 
that  the  statement,  '  Caius  is  sick,'  and  the  syllogism,  *  All  men  are  mortal,  Caius  is  a 
man,  therefore  Caius  is  mortal,'  are  thoughts  [Gedanken,]  not  intuitions  [Anschauungen,] 
as  in  the  first  case  we  do  not  rest  in  the  simple  image  of  Caius,  but  unite  the  proposition 
with  it  that  he  is  sick,  &c." 

To  this  extract  I  might  add  the  article  from  the  Conversations-Lexicon,  in  which  the 
writer  draws  a  distinction  between  outward  and  inward  intuitions,  the  former  being  the 
intuitions  of  all  objects  in  space,  the  latter  of  all  objects  only  in  time,  which  we  per- 
ceive only  as  changes  in  ourselves,  such  as  the  images  of  our  imagination  [as  in  the 
examples  of  Kiesewetter,  the  mountain  stream,  or  the  late  king,]  our  thoughts,  &c. 
He  then  proceeds  to  say,  that  all  outward  things,  having  a  representation,  and  being 
necessarily  in  some  time,  are  also  inivard,  and  thus  by  our  imagination  we  can  repre 
sent  the  objects  of  space  in  our  minds ;  '  but  on  the  contrary,  that  inward  representations, 
being  only  representable  in  time,  not  in  space,  cannot  at  the  same  time  be  outward  things, 
and  hence  that  the  latter  class  of  representations  have  no  form.'  After  speaking  of  the 
fine  arts,  he  then  proceeds  farther  to  say,  that  the  "effect  of  any  work  of  art  depends 
chiefly  on  its  Anschaulichkeit,  and  is  more  lively  and  will  please  more,  the  more  its 
representations  resemble  our  intuitive  representations." 

I  might  accumulate  more  extracts  on  this  subject,  but  the  above  will  be  sufficient  for 
our  present  purpose,  which  is,  not  to  write  an  Introduction  to  the  elements  of  German 
Philosophy,  but  to  bring  forward  sufficient  to  illustrate  the  use  of  some  of  the  terms 
which  occur  in  sections  iv.  and  v.,  (see  pages  239,  242,  243,  244,  263,  264.)  It  will 
be  seen  from  these  extracts  that  in  its  strictest  {ihilosopiiical  sense,  JlnscJuiuung  means  an 
image  of  one  outward  object  in  the  mind,  conveyed  thither  by  the  sight,  but  tiiat  it  is 


THE  TRANSLATOR  S  PREFACE.  CCXXIU 

used  generally  for  any  ideas  of  sense.  I  may,  perhaps,  observe,  that  I  should 
have  done  better  to  translate  it  by  intuition  than  by  perception.  In  page  2t>i  also. 
Intuition  would,  perhaps,  be  the  best  translation.  In  page  242,  I  believe  that  the 
note  and  the  translation  when  compared  with  the  above  extracts  from  other  writers, 
will  convey  the  meaning  of  my  author  with  tolerable  justice.  He  there  contrasts  the 
v^nscfumimgen  of  the  Eastern  people  with  the  abstractions  of  the  Western, — the  lively 
pictures  which  the  former  raised  in  their  imaginations  with  the  abstractions  of  the  latter. 
Thus  Sophia  became  with  the  Eastern  people,  not  an  abstract  idea  of  Wisdom,*  which 
they  would  not  attempt  to  reason  upon,  but  a  person,  whom  they  could  picture  to  their 
minds,  and  to  which  they  could  attribute  all  the  qualities  and  actions  of  a  person,  and 
thus  represent  to  themselves  all  that  related  to  her,  Avith  the  most  graphic  livehness. 
Their  whole  system  of  ^Eons,  Pleroma,  &c.,  are  nothing  but  a  set  of  pictures,  called 
up  and  figured  in  their  prolific  imaginations ;  and  it  is  in  this  respect  in  which  they  are 
said  to  be  so  devoted  to  Anscluiuungcn  in  preference  to  Betfriffe.  Intuition  and  pictorial 
representation  to  tlie  mind,  are  the  two  chief  points  to  which  we  must  turn  our  attention 
in  all  passages  where  the  word  Anschauung  occurs,  and  these  two  leading  points  will, 
I  think,  explain  all  such  passages  in  this  work. 

I  now  pass  on  to  the  next  word,  which  may  be  much  more  briefly  treated,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  length  to  which  the  preceding  discussion  has  been  carried. 

"  Begriff.  Begriff  is  a  representation,  through  which  something  is  thought  upon ;  but 
an  object  is  thought  upon,  when  we  represent  it  by  means  of  certain  sipis.f  From  the 
collecting  together  of  these  signs  (a  concipiendis  notis,)  such  a  representation  is  called 
a  [Begriff,  or]  Conception  (Conceptus,  notio.)  The  Begriff  or  Conception  is,  therefore, 
a  mediate  and  general  [or  common,  gemeinsame~\  representation,  and  is,  therefore,  essen- 
tially distinguished  from  an  ^iiiscfumung,  or  an  Empjindung,  through  which  something 
individual  is  always  represented ;  as  when  any  one  beholds  a  house,  or  feels  a  pain. 
But  he,  who  only  thinks  upon  that,  which  we  call  a  house  or  a  pain,  he  has  a  [Begriff] 
conception  of  it,  which  he  may  refer  to  any  house  or  pain  whatsoever.  A  Conception, 
therefore,  [or  Begriff]  is  the  unity  of  a  multitude  [eines  Mannigfaltigen,J]  which  mul- 
titude may  be  greater  or  less,  but  is  always  more  comprehensive  than  the  multitude  of 
the  Anschauung.  He  who  looks  upon  the  starry  heaven,  beholds  many  stars,  but  the 
conception  [Begriff]  of  a  star  goes  far  wider;  it  comprehends  those  under  the  horizon, 
and  even  those  which  are  invisible  by  reason  of  their  distance.  So  also,  he  who  thinks 
upon  a  house  or  a  mountain  by  means  of  conceptions,  has  a  more  comprehensive 
representation  of  it,  than  he  who  merely  looks  upon  many  houses  and  mountains, 
although  the  intuitive  representation  [or  Anschauung]  is  fuller  of  contents  or  subject 
matter,  and  therefore,  more  lively  than  the  conception  [Begriff]  which  only  contains 
what  is  common  to  these  things.  If  we  wish  to  become  thoroughly  acquainted  with 
any  [Begriff,  or]  Conception,  we  must  analyse  it,  that  is,  divide  it  into  its  signs  or 
marks,  as  far  as  this  is  possible.  We  thus  learn  its  contents  [its  subject  matter,  its 
complexus,]  and  we  can  then  determine  how  far  it  goes,  that  is,  to  how  many  things  it 
applies,"  &c. — Krug,  vol.  i.  p.  306. 

Kiesewetter  (1.  c.  p.  14 — 17,)  says,  "  There  are  three  kinds  of  thoughts.  Conceptions, 
Judgments,  and  Conclusions,^^  (Begriffe,  Urtheile,  und  Schlusse,)  and  then  characterises 
the  first  of  them  thus : — "  A  Conception  [Begriff]  is,  like  an  Anschauung,  a  single 
representation,  but  not  like  the  latter,  a  representation  of  a  single  object,  as  it  represents 
many  objects;  it  is  also  mediate,  whereas  on  the  contrary,  an  Anschauung  is  imme- 

*  I  do  not  by  the  use  of  this  word  mean  to  assert  we  can  have  really  any  abstract  idea  of  wisdom, 
or  that  wisdom  is  more  than  an  abstract  term,  which  we  must  unite  with  a  Being,  before  we  can 
conceive  it :  in  which  case  it  becomes  a  concrete,  not  an  abstract  idea.  I  do  not  enter  into  tliis 
quesiion  at  all,  which  most  metaphysical  writers  discuss  at  great  length. 

t  Under  Be^reifen,  Knig  says,  '  This  word  means  to  feel  with  the  fingers,  as  we  do  in  order  to 
acquaint  ourselves  accurately  with  any  thing.  Bui  bcf^reifcn  also  means  to  form  Begriffe,  because 
these  exist  by  means  of  the  taJiin^  lopelher  of  a  variety  of  things.' 

t  This  might  be  translated,  '  the  unity  of  ihe  Multifarious,'  which  is  always  more  comprehen- 
eive  than  the  Multifariousness  of  the  Anschauung. 


CCXXIV  THE  TRANSLATOR  S  PREFACE. 

diate.  The  conception  Man,  is  a  single  representation,  but  refers  to  many  objects ;  I 
do  not  obtain  the  Conception  On  Man  immediately,  as  I  do  the  Anschauung  oi'  Caius, 
but  mediately." 

He  afterwards  says : 

'•  Our  first  conceptions  arise  out  of  intuitions,  but  it  is  quite  clear  that  we  do  not 
merely  separately  our  conceptions  only  from  intuitions,  as  explained  above;*  but  can 
also  create  new  conceptions  from  our  existing  conceptions.  Thus  abstracting  from 
Lion,  Tiger,  Wolf,  Stc,  all  in  which  they  differ,  and  combining  what  remains,  we  have 
a  new  conception,  '  a  quadruped  of  prey.'  " 

This  will  suffice  on  the  subject  of  Begriff. 

Beivusstseyn,  Consciousness.  It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  the  philosophical  ques- 
tions connected  with  this  word,  as  Dr.  Neander  seems  generally  to  apply  it  in  its 
common  and  usual  sense,  although  sometimes,  by  a  more  lax  usage  of  language;  he 
may  unite  with  the  common  meaning  of  consciousness,  a  moral  sense,  which  renders 
it  more  nearly  equivalent  to  our  word  conscience. 

The  note  subjoined  to  the  word  Gottesbewusstsein,  Avill  suffice  for  its  explanation. 

Erkcnnlniss,  Cognition.     Erkenntnisse,  Cognitions. 

"  Erkenncn  (Cognoscere)  means  not  only  to  represent  or  to  think  of  any  thing,  but 
to  refer  one's  representations  (Vorstellungenf)  to  real  objects,  and  to  distinguish  these 
objects  from  each  other,  as  things  of  a  definite  character.  This  Erkennen,  or  cognizing, 
is  more  than  merely  thinking;  it  is  a  real  laying  hold  (erfassen,  or  ergreifen)  of  things 
— on  which  account  the  old  philosophers  designated  it  also  by  the  name  jtAToxiz/jgava/, 
or  coraprehendere — but  then  this  takes  place  by  means  of  representations  (Vorstel- 
lungen.)  These  representations  are  partly  sensiious  [derived  from  the  senses,]  or,  are 
intuitions  [Anschauungen,  see  the  word,]  and  sensations  [Empfindungen,]  which  refer 
to  the  Individual  (this  or  that  particular  object,)  and,  partly  intellectual  [derived  from 
the  Understanding,]  or  Conceptions  [Begriffe]  which  refer  to  the  General  (or  that 
which  is  common  to  many  things.)  But  if  any  thing  real  is  to  be  known  {erkmnt, 
cognized,)  it  must  be  given  (datum,)  or  at  least  capable-of-being-given  (dabile,)  i.  e.,  it 
must  be  capable  of  being  seen,  or  felt;  or  to  speak  more  generally,  of  being  perceived 
(wahrnehmen.)  Whatever  is  not  in  any  manner  perceivable  (neither  inwardly  nor 
outwardly)  that  is  also  not  cognizable  (erkennbar,  knowahle;)  it  cannot  be  pointed  out 
and  defined  objectively  in  its  reality,  although  subjectively  in  the  consciousness  of  the 
EgoJ  there  may  be  grounds  for  maintaining  its  existence.  In  this  case  it  is  an  object  of 
Belief,  not  of  knowledge,  the  latter  being  only  said  of  what  we  maintain  from  objective 
or  real  sources  of  cognition." 

''  Erkenntniss  (Cognitio.)  Cognition,  as  the  result  of  cognizing  (Erkennen,  see  the 
foregoing  article,)  is  said  both  individually  and  generally.  In  the  case  of  individual 
things,  cognition  is  the  reference  of  a  representation  to  a  given  object,  by  which  it  is 
distinguished  as  a  definite  thing,  from  other  things  which  more  or  less  resemble  it. 
Thus  we  have  a  cognition  [or  knowledge]  of  the  Moon,  when  it  is  represented  as  a 
heavenly  body  revolving  round  the  Earth,  and  undergoing  certain  changes.  Thus  we 
perceive  it  competently,  and  consider  it  a  real  thing,  although  to  us  it  is  only  an 
appearance  [Erscheinung,  a  Phenomenon;]  for  what  it  is,  independently  of  the  manner 
in  which  it  is  represented  to  us,  i.  e.,  what  it  is  in  its  own  nature^  Ave  do  not  know. 
The  same  is  true  of  other  things  which  we  perceive,  as  we  do  the  moon,  constantly  in 
a  certain  manner,  and  necessarily  represent  according  to  this  perception  of  it.  We  are, 
therefore,  justified  in  laying  down  as  a  general  principle-of-cognition  the  following 
proposition.     All  which  is  necessarily  represented  in  the  case  of  a  real  thing,  as  far  as 

*  He  had  explained  the  process  of  abstraction  in  another  section. 

t  It  must  be  remembered,  as  an  able  writer  has  well  stated  it,  (Ed.  Rev.  Oct.  1832,)  that  Vor- 
stellung  is  the  genua  of  which  Idee,  Anschauung,  and  Begriff,  are  the  species.  Of  these,  Idee  is 
used  in  strict  philosophy  only  for  the  ideas  of  the  Reason. 

X  The  word  here  stands  for  the  thinking  subject. 

'5>  Aa  a  thing-in-itself,  is  the  literal  translation,  '  Ding  an  sich.' 


THE    translator's    PREFACE.  CCXXV 

It  appears,  according  to  our  original  mode  of  perception,  belongs  to  it  as  an  objectof 
cognition,  and  may,  therefore,  be  predicated  of  it  in  judgments  which  are  universally 
valid.  The  sum  [Inbegriff"]  of  these  judgments  is  Hnman-knmvledire  genemlly.  We 
also  consider  ourselves  as  the  containers,  or  bearers  of  cognition  (the  subjecta  cogni- 
tionis,  or  subjects  in  which  these  cognitions  reside,)  and  the  things  which  we  thus 
know  are  its  objects  (objecta  cognitionis.') — Krug,  vol.  i.  p.  816-17. 

In  the  Conversations-Lexicon  the  writer,  after  giving  an  explanation  nearly  equivalent 
to  the  above,  and  distinguishing  between  Sense,  Understanding,  and  Reason,  goes  on  to 
say,  "  Reason  is  elevated  above  Sense  and  Understanding,  and  its  peculiar  representa- 
tions are  called  Ideas,  as  e.  g-.  the  representations  of  Godhead,  Freedom,  Immortality, 
Duty,  Virtue,  &c.  Whether  and  how  far  any  thing  can  be  known  [erkannt]  through 
these  Ideas,  is  taught  by  the  Theory  of  the  Faculty-of-Cognition,  which  investigates 
the  laws  and  limits  of  this  facuhy.  But  presupposing  that  something  can  be  known  by 
our  Reason,  it  must  be  called  the  highest  faculty  of  Cognition,  as  there  is  nothing  in 
human  nature  higher  than  the  Reason.  The  Understanding  and  the  Reason  are  often 
classed  together  under  the  name  of  the  higher  faculty  of  Cognition,  because  these  two 
faculties  in  common  language  are  not  distinguished  so  accurately  as  scientific  precision 
requires. 

•*  The  distinction  between  empirical  and  rational  cogntion  belongs  here.  The  former 
(from  i/utTv^ia,  experience)  is  a  knowledge  whose  validity  rests  on  experience,  and  herein 
upon  the  lower  or  sensuous  faculty-of-cognition.  The  latter  is  a  knowledge,  the 
validity  of  which  reposes  on  grounds  which  can  be  known  only  through  the  higher, 
the  intellectual,*  or  the  rational  faculty-of-cognition.  The  Avhole  knowledge  of  man, 
however,  is  an  indivisible  whole,  connected  together  within  him,  and  as  such,  a  com- 
mon production  of  Sense,  Understanding,  and  Reason,  jointly." 

I  need  not  add  more  on  the  subject  of  the  word  Erkenntniss,  which  the  reader  will 
find  used  frequently ;  but  the  above  observations  may  serve  to  rectify  any  mistake 
into  which  the  translation  might  otherwise  lead.  The  word  is,  perhaps,  in  neither 
case  used  by  our  author  in  its  strictest  philosophical  sense ;  but  if  it  be,  '  definite  con- 
ception,' would  not  be  accurate,  but  simply  'cognition.'  In  another  place  I  have 
translated  '  speculative  Erkenntnisse'  by  '  speculative  ideas,'  which  in  popular  language 
may  adequately  represent  the  original,  although  it  is  not  philosophically  just.  '  Spe- 
culative cognitions'  would  be  the  accurate  translation,  which  would  be  nearly  equivalent 
to  what  we  should  call  '  a  philosophical  knowledge,'  or  theoretical,  as  opposed  to  imral 
and  practical.     (See  Krug's  Lexicon,  under  the  word  '  speculative.') 

I  may  here  conveniently  point  out  an  inaccuracy  in  p.  270  of  this  translation  ; 
which,  although  it  does  not  lead  to  any  great  misapprehension  of  the  author's  meaning, 
deserves  correction. 

The  sentence  to  which  I  allude  is  the  following:  "All  the  powers  and  modes  of 
operation  of  the  soul,  which  are  directed  to  that  which  is  temporal  and  perishable — 
such  as.  its  powers  of  reflection  and  the  understanding,  in  which,  according  to  Valen- 
tinus,  is  contained  the  •l'jx>'t  will  then  utterly  cease."t 

The  error  here  is  very  easily  corrected.  I  Avould  substitute  for  the  latter  part  of  it 
the  following  translation  :  "  such  as  its  faculty  of  reflection,  the  understanding,  the  sum 
of  Avhich  powers,  according  to  Valentinus,  is  the  4u;^«,  will  then  utterly  cease."  Der 
Verstand  is  in  apposition  with  das  Reflexions-vefmogen — Avith  which  it  is  synonymous, 
and.  therefore,  the  connecting  particle  'and'  is  erroneous.  The  former  translation  '  in 
which  is  contained  the  4t';t''>'  is  neither  so  accurate  nor  so  free  from  ambiguity  as  the 
latter.  But  the  error  which  I  am  anxious  to  correct  is  the  making  two  faculties  out  of 
two  words  used  synonymously. 

These  are  the  chief  words  which  require  illustration,  or  give  me  reason  to  fear  that 

*  EvPti  in  this  sentence  the  Understanding  and  the  Reason  seem  too  little  distinguished. 
t  The  original  is:  Wie  das  Reflexions-vermogen,  der  Verstand,  deren  Inbegriff  dem  Valentinus 
die  "l^X"  ist,  &,c. 


ccxxvi  THE  translator's  preface. 

my  version  may  in  some  degree  fall  short  of  the  full  meaning  of  the  original ;  but  I 
think,  after  this  full  explanation,  no  one  can  find  any  difficulty  in  placing  himself  in 
the  condition  of  a  reader  of  the  original  work  in  these  passages. 

There  are,  however,  one  or  two  other  words  or  phrases,  Avhich  are  nsed  in  this  work, 
m  a  manner  which  almost  baffles  exact  translation.  For  instance,  the  words  Mensch- 
Iieit  and  die  menschliche  JVatur,  are  used  with  a  twofold  reference.  When  we  speak  of 
the  renovation,  improvement,  &,c.,  of  human  nature,  we  may  mean  two  things,  either 
a  general  renovation  and  improvement  over  the  whole  mass  of  human  beings,  or  im- 
provement in  every  part  of  man's  nature,  his  will,  his  affections,  &c.  Now  it  is  not 
always  easy  to  determine  to  which  of  these  notions  it  is  to  be  referred,  or  whether  to  a 
sort  of  notion  compounded  of  these  two.  But  this  cannot  offer  any  obscurity  which  a 
little  thought  and  consideration  will  not  readily  remove,  and  it  has  hardly,  therefore, 
been  deemed  worth  while  to  add  any  explanatory  periphrasis,  which  would  only  en- 
cumber the  text,  already  sufficiently  complicated  in  its  structure. 

Again,  the  word  Leben  '  Life,'  admits  of  an  use,  which  is  inadequately  represented 
by  our  word  '  Life,'  although  the  word  '  vital '  is  used  in  a  kindred  sense.  It  is  used  in 
a  religious  sense  for  all  in  religion  which  animates  and  excites  us  to  an  endeavour  after 
improvement  in  our  spiritual  condition— all  which  raises  us  from  the  death  of  sin  to  the 
life  of  Righteousness— all  which  raises  us  up  from  a  dead  and  lifeless  unconcern  about 
our  souls  to  a  lively  interest  in  them— all  that  excites,  raises,  and  purifies  our  religious 
affections.  Now,  although  'lively'  and  'vital,'  are  applied  in  a  sense  somewhat 
analogous  to  this,  our  English  word  'Life,'  hardly  represents  this  range  of  ideas,  ex- 
cept m  the  combination  of  particular  phrases.  Thus,  it  would  be  legitimate  to  use  it  in  a 
phrase  like  the  following,  "There  is  no  life  in  that  man's  religion;"  and  such  a  phrase 
would  be  intelligible,  but  the  word  hardly  bears  so  wide  an  application  as  the  German 
'  Leben,'  in  the  first  sentence,  in  section  v.  I  have,  however,  ventured  to  use  it 
there,  as  the  context  would  explain  it.  The  word  there  translated  '  understanding' 
is  BegrifT,  which  is  more  properly  'conception;'  but  the  word  'understanding,'  or 
'  knowledge,'  in  the  popular  acceptation  of  th# terms,  perhaps,  conveys  the  meaning  of 
the  author  better  than  a  translation  more  philosophically  accurate.  At  all  events,  with 
the  context,  and  these  few  observations,  there  can  be  no  difficulty  to  any  one  in  fixing 
the  exact  import  of  the  phrase. 

Eudcemonism,  (section  v.)  Perhaps,  the  following  explanation  from  Krug,  (vol.  i. 
p.  848,)  may  be  of  service.  After  showing  the  meaning  of  Eudamonie  to  be  happiness, 
(ij  and  SMf^mv,  having  a  condition  like  that  of  a  good  genius,  or  happiness,)  Krug  pro- 
ceeds : — "  EmUemonist,  therefore,  means  one  who  strives  only  after  happiness,  and  that, 
too,  his  own  happiness;  and  Eudcemonism  means  that  line  of  opinion  and  conduct 
which  is  thorouglily  imbued  with  such  an  endeavour,  as  well  as  a  system  adapted 
to  it." 

I  may,  perhaps,  be  allowed  to  mention  that  I  have  employed  the  article  and  the 
adjective,  to  express  abstract  terms,  more  frequently  than  is  common  in  English  com- 
position. In  German  it  is  a  phraseology  of  most  frequent  occurrence  ;  and  I  have 
sometimes  found-  ii  almost  impossible  to  express  the  meaning  of  the  original  without 
it.  I  have,  in  order  to  call  attention  to  the  circumstance,  usually  prefixed  a  capital 
letter  to  the  adjective. 

In  translating  the  Avord  Kirchen-lehrer,  I  have  generally  avoided  the  more  convenient 
and  common  phrase  of  '  the  Fathers,'  except  when  reference  is  made  to  them  as 
authors.  The  phrase,  Church-teachers,  seems  more  appropriate  in  the  translation  of  a 
work  of  this  kind,  where  the  author  speaks  of  what  was  actually  fcxught  in  the 
Church,  more  especially  as  the  phrase  of  '  the  Fathers'  is  used  in  German,  as  well  as 
m  English. 

Where  I  have  given  explanatory  additions,  &c.,  I  have  enclosed  them  usually  in 
brackets  of  this  form  [     ],  to  distinguish  them  from  the  parentheses  of  the  author. 


THE    TRANSLATOR'S    PREFACE.  CCXXVll 

which  are  within  the  common  parenthetical  signs.  I  regret  to  observe,  that  in  a  few 
cases  this  precaution  has  been  overlooked,  but,  I  trust,  not  so  as  to  create  any  confusion. 
With  these  remarks  on  the  phraseology,  &.C.,  of  the  original  and  the  translation,  I 
now  close  this  preface.  I  fear  some  readers  may  think  it  too  extended,  and  that  I  have 
descended  to  too  minute  particulars,  and  to  explanations  which  can  hardly  be  needed 
by  those  into  whose  hands  this  volume  is  likely  to  fall.  But  as  some  of  these  words 
and  explanations  refer  to  most  interesting  portions  of  the  original  (e.  g-.  the  explanation 
and  development  of  the  Gnostic  systems,)  I  am  desirous  to  place  every  one  as  far  as 
possible,  in  the  condition  of  a  reader  of  the  original,  and  to  obviate  by  every  means  in 
my  power,  any  difference  between  the  original  and  the  copy.  It  is  a  matter  of  interest 
to  see  the  light  in  which  a  mind,  like  that  of  Dr.  Neander,  views  the  subjects  he  here 
treats ;  and  the  more  faithful  I  can  make  my  transcript  of  the  original,  the  more  I  shall 
have  done  for  the  satisfaction  of  those  who  feel  this  interest.  It  is  still  my  maxim  that 
it  is  the  chief  business  of  a  translator  to  'say  every  thing  which  the  author  says,  and  no- 
thing whatever  Avhich  he  does  not  say.'  (Pref  to  sections  i.  ii.  iii.,  p.  vii.)  How  far  I  have 
succeeded  in  this  I  must  leave  others  to  judge.  I  will  only  add  that,  both  in  translating 
the  work,  and  in  the  observations  I  have  made  on  any  of  its  tendencies  or  views,  the 
single  object  I  have  had  in  view  has  been  to  serve  the  cause  of  truth  and  religion;  and 
if  those  who  are  entitled  to  judge  on  these  great  questions,  shall  think  that  I  have  not 
entirely  failed  in  that  object,  I  shall  feel  that  my  labour  has  not  been  in  vain. 

H.  J.  Rose. 
Hmighton  Conquest,  1841. 


229 


SECTION  IV. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  CHKISTIAIVITY,  AS  CONCEIVED  AND  DEVELOPED  UNDER  THE  FORM  OF 
A  SYSTEM  OF  DOCTRINES. 

(1.)  Gmtral  Introductoivj  Remarks. 


Christianity  showed  itself  in  doc- 
trines as  well  as  in  human  life  to  be  no 
constraining,  dead,  and  killing  letter,  but 
a  spirit  developing  itself  freely,  and  pro- 
moting its  own  free  development, — a  liv- 
ing spirit  that  made  alive  also.  It  was 
not  given  to  man  as  a  compact,  dogmatical 
system  in  one  definite  form,  which  was  to 
be  propagated  from  the  very  beginning 
as  something  unchangeable  in  a  lifeless 
channel  of  transmission,  but  the  One  truth 
was  to  be  developed  in  various  forms, 
and  manifold  relations,  and  applications, 
through  die  means  of  its  Jirst  instruments, 
so  characteristically  distinguished  from 
each  other,  and  sanctified  for  the  work ; 
and  particularly  by  the  ybi^r  pillars  of  the 
Church,  the  apostles  Paul  and  James, 
Peter  and  John,  who  represent  whole 
characteristic  dispositions  of  human  na- 
ture, when  enlightened  by  Christianity. 
It  was  left  to  the  free  conceptions  of  each 
individual  human  spirit  to  recognise  the 
oneness  of  divine  truth  under  the  variety 
of  human  representation,  and  just  as  each 
man  felt  himself  more  attracted  by  this  or 
that  form  of  apostolic  Christianity,  accord- 
ing as  his  peculiar  nature  was  more  akin 
to  this  or  that  disposition,  and  according 
as  the  peculiarities  of  his  nature  and  his 
individual  education  conducted  him  from 
this  or  that  side  to  Christianity,  which 
may  be  approached  from  so  many  difTer- 
ent  sides.  It  was  left  to  each  man  also  to 
appropriate  Christianity  to  himself  in  his 
own  individual  mode,  and  when  once  ap- 
propriated to  exhibit  it  again  in  his  own 
individual  mode  in  his  spiritual  life.  In 
those  first  documents  of  the  communica- 
tion of  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the  holy  | 
truths  were  revealed  in  their  simplicity 
and  loftiness,  and  made  capable  of  a  mani- ! 
fold  lively  application,  but  not  set  forth ' 
in  a  perfecdy  formed  human  system.  | 
SystPm  and  organic  unity  lay  in  the  thing  \ 
itself;  there  was  the  real  inward  uriify  and 
tlie  inward  connection  of  Christianity  as 
One  whole,  in  which  all  individual  parts 
develope  Uiemselves  from  one  centre  point, 
and  are  harmoniously  interwoven  together 


j  by  means  of  one  fundamental  principle. 
I  Now  this  inward  unity  laid  its  foundations 
in  the  hiward  life  of  men,  together  with 
!  Christianity  itself,  as  soon  as  they  had  re- 
[  ceived  Christianity  into  their  hearts  by  a 
lively  faith ;  and  yet  it  was  only  by  de- 
I  grees  that  out  of  this  inward  unity  Christi- 
I  anity  could  develope  itself  as  a  systematic 
whole,  in  thought  as  well  as  in  all  other 
branches  of  life,  with  clear  and  full  per- 
\  ceptions  and  consciousness.     In  relation 
to  its  spiritual,  as  well  as  to  its  moral  re- 
ception, it  proved   itself  by  its  peculiar 
efficacy  a  leaven  destined  by  degrees  to 
penetrate  the  whole  mass  of  human  life. 
This  is  true,  as  well  of  the  individual  doc- 
trines  of  Christianity   as   of  the  Avhole 
religion  itself. 

As  Christianity,  therefore,  considered  in 
the  light  of  a  whole,  could  only  by  de- 
grees, and  with  a  constantly  increasing 
clearness,  unfold  itself  in  the  spiritual  con- 
science of  the  thinking  man,  as  a  connected 
system,  rejecting  every  thing  foreign  to  its 
nature  which  attempted  from  without  to 
join  itself  with  it;  so  also  it  was  only 
gradually  that  the  full  scope  of  the  single 
doctrines  contained  in  this  one  whole 
could  stand  forth  clearly  and  definitely  in 
this  same  conscience.  As  in  life,  so  in 
thought  Christianity  found  a  world  already 
in  existence,  which  was  formed  on  differ- 
ent principles,  and  in  which  it  must  first 
create  a  way  for  itself  by  means  of  its 
overcoming  and  reforming  spirit.  As  in 
life,  so  in  the  regions  of  thought  it  was 
necessary  for  Christianity  to  contend 
against  the  opposite  dispositions  which 
were  then  in  vogue,  and  which  opposed 
it  not  only  with  open  enmity,  but  by  par- 
tially stealing  something  of  Christianity, 
and  making  it  their  own,  threatened  to 
mix  themselves  up  with  it.  This  was  the 
more  likely  to  happen  then,  because 
Christianity  appeared  in  a  period  so  full 
of  ferment  and  of  expectation,  and  exer- 
cised a  power  which  attracted  tlie  oppo- 
site elements  and  dispositions  of  human 
nature  from  so  many  difTerent  sides;  and 
those   peculiar  dispositions  which  were 


EARLY  SECTS. LATE  REJECTION  OF  THE  LAW. 


230 

unable  to  resist  the  attractive  power  of 
Christidiiity  were  yet  unwilling  to  give 
themselves  up  to  it  wholly,  and  suffer 
their  own  deficiencies  to  be  supplied  by  it, 
but  they  were  inclined  to  set  up  a  Chris- 
tianity of  their  own  for  themselves,  and 
capriciously  to  sever  what  in  that  religion 
is  one  and  inseparable.  But  still  the 
opposition  against  these  adulterated  and 
partial  conceptions  of  Christianity  and  of 
Christian  doctrines  served  well  to  bring 
forward  more  clearly  and  definitely  in  the 
thinking  conscience  the  peculiar  nature 
and  inward  unity  of  Christianity,  and  the 
peculiar  import  and  character  of  its  seve- 
ral doctrines. 

But  since  the  development  of  the  Chris- 
tian scheme  of  doctrine  can  only  be  fully 
understood  by  means  of  its  connection  and 
its  contentions  with  these  manifold  oppo- 
sitions to  it,  we  shall  find  it  absolutely 
necessary  previously  to  give  these  oppo- 
sitions, as  they  appear  in  the  various 
Christian  sects,  a  more  accurate  conside- 
ration. 

(2.)   TJie  History  of  Sects. 

There  were  two  main  divisions  of  the 
religious  character;  the  one  a  carnal 
spirit,  that  endeavoured  to  lower  every 
thing  to  the  level  of  sense,  and  the  other 
an  exclusively  spiritual  disposition,  that 
spiritualized  and  refined  every  thing  away 
too  much  ; — which  opposed  Christianity 
from  the  very  beginning,  or  threatened  to 
adulterate  it  by  mixing  themselves  up  with 
it.*  The  one  party  rested  wholly  on  the 
earthhj  appearance  of  the  (Z«)me,and  in  it 
overlooked  the  higher  Spirit  which  ani- 
mated it;  the  other  thought  that  they 
could  grasp  the  overwhelming  Spirit  with- 
out the  reality  of  the  appearance  :  the  one 
would  have  in  Christianity  only  the  human 
without  the  divine ;  the  other  only  the 
divine  without  the  human.  When  first 
Christianity  arose  out  of  Judaism,  it  was 
from  Judaism  that  the  first  intermixture  of 
these  two  dispositions  with  it  proceeded 
also.  The  first  disposition  was  the  most 
prevalent  among  the  great  mass  of  the 
Jewish  people,  and  therefore,  this  came  the 
first  into  contact  with  Christianity,  and 
thence  proceeded  all  those  sects,  which, 
mistaking  the  peculiar  and  characteristic 
difference  between  the  law  and  the  gospel, 
made  out  of  Christianity  only  a  perfected 
Judaism,  and  which  were  unable  to  com- 
prehend and  acknowledge  what  is  iho- 


•  Compare    the    introduction    to    this    work, 
page  36. 


i  roughly  new  in  Christianity  and  its  effects, 
as  well  as  that  by  which  Christ  is  distin- 
I  guished  from  all  the  sages  and  saints  of  the 
1  old  Testament. 

I  (a.)   Tlie  JiMlttizing  Sects. 

j  The  origin  of  these  sects  carries  us  back 
:  into  the  apostolic  age.  Among  those 
'  things  of  which  Christ  said  that  the  apos- 
tles could  not  yet  understand  them,  and 
that  they  should  first  be  revealed  to  them 
by  the  illumination  of  the  Spirit,  one  of 
the  most  pre-eminent  was  the  doctrine 
which  is  so  intimately  interwoven  with 
the  nature  of  the  gospel, — the  doctrine  of 
the  foundation  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
in  all  mankind.,  only  by  faith  in  the  Re- 
deemer ;  from  which  the  abrogation  of 
the  ceremonial  law  of  Moses  followed  as 
a  matter  of  course.  Even  after  the  apos- 
tles, by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
had  attained  to  the  right  knowledge  of  the 
Redeemer,  they  were,  nevertheless,  not 
immediately  in  clear  possession  of  all  the 
consequences  which  flow  from  this  doc- 
trine in  regard  to  the  all-sufficiency  of  faith 
in  Him,  and  the  needlessness  of  the  Mosaic 
ceremonial  law.  Even  when  they  per- 
ceived that  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  was 
to  reach  the  heathen  also,  and  that  they 
were  to  become  fellow-partakers  in  the 
kingdom  of  Christ,  (as  indeed,  many  of 
the  better  spirits  among  the  Jews  had 
already  deduced  this  from  the  prophecies,) 
even  then  they  had  no  other  notion  than 
that  the  heathen,  together  with  the  gospel, 
were  to  embrace  the  whole  ceremonial  law 
of  Moses.  It  was  only  when  St.  Peter, 
having  been  called  to  the  conversion  of 
Cornelius,  by  means  of  a  vision  connected 
with  this  call,  the  meaning  and  object  of 
which  the  Spirit  of  God  had  taught  him 
to  understand,  had  been  persuaded  that 
God  made  no  difference  between  Jew  and 
Gentile,  and  when  he  saw  faith  in  the 
Gospel  working  with  the  same  divine 
power  among  the  heathen,  that  he  became 
the  man  to  stand  up  among  the  apostles 
at  Jerusalem  as  a  witness  to  the  truth 
which  he  now  recognised ;  and  the  apostles 
then,  by  the  light  of  the  Spirit,  attained  to 
a  knowledge  of  that  which  hitherto  had 
been  sealed  up  to  them  in  the  counsels  of 
God  in  regard  to  man's  redemption.  When 
St.  Paul  afterwards  was  chosen  out  espe- 
cially as  the  instrument  of  God  for  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  what  he  calls  the 
mystery  of  Christ,  into  which  he  had  re- 
ceived so  tleep  an  insight,  was  announced 
to  the  rest  of  the  apostles,  as  well  as  to 
himself,  (Ephes.  iii.  4,  5 ;)  and  here  also 


JEWISH    AND    HEATHEN    CHRISTIANS. 


no  contest  of  principles  could  take  place  i 
among  llicm,  as  is  beautifully  declared  in 
the  apostolic  council  at  Jerusalem.  (Acts 
XV.)  But  ilie  dillln-cnt  spheres  of  opera- ^ 
ti(m  chosen  by  the  apostles,  introduced  an  \ 
outward  difference  in  their  mode  of  pro-  [ 
ceeding.  j 

Tliose  apostles,  whose  exertions  lay ! 
entirely  among  the  Jews  in  Palestine, 
themselves  observed  the  ceremonial  law, 
and  left  its  observance  to  be  contined,  for 
this  was  a  matter  of  perfect  indifference, 
being  only  an  outward  thing,  as  long  as 
the  conscience  made  no  more  of  it,  and 
as  long  as  people  did  not  profess  to  seek 
justification  and  sanctification  by  it.  But 
the  fdHcij,  that  sanctification  might  be 
found  in  ceremonial  observances,  could 
not  be  destroyed  by  an  outward  attack, 
from  simply  dirowlng  away  the  ceremo- 
nial law  at  once ;  for  what  was  founded 
on  persuasion,  could  only  be  removed  by 
persuasion  also.  If  the  belief,  that  sanc- 
tification and  holiness  can  only  be  attained 
through  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  had 
once  been  able  thoroughly  to  penetrate 
the  consciences  of  mankind,  ceremonies 
would  have  fallen  away  of  themselves. 
But  if  men  were  persuaded  overhastily  , 
to  throw  them  away,  many  weak-minded  i 
people  might  be  led  away  to  do  things 
which  their  consciences  might  reproach 
them  for, — and  others,  who  might  have 
been  won  to  the  Gospel  by  degrees,  had 
they  only  been  able  to  join  it  outwardly 
at  first,  would  then  be  wholly  inclined  to 
reject  it  from  the  very  beginning.  This 
was  always  the  plan  pursued  by  a  pure 
evangelic  spirit,  not  to  begin  with  an 
ouhoard  amendment,  but  to  suffer  only  the 
inward  power  of  truth  to  effect  every 
thing  itself,  working  from  within  to  things 
without. 

The  case  of  St.  Paul,  whose  sphere  of 
exertion  lay  among  the  heathen,  was  dif- 
ferent. Among  them,  the  connection  of 
Christianity  with  the  ceremonial  law 
would  only  increase,  to  the  utmost  de- 
gree, the  difficulty  of  its  propagation; 
because  the  prevailing  peculiarities  of  the 
heathen  people  were  so  strongly  opposed 
to  that  law.  The  only  thing  which  could 
possibly  have  brought  them  to  submit  to 
a  yoke  so  burthensome  to  their  peculiar 
habits,  and  to  make  so  great  a  sacrifice, 
would  have  been  the  persuasion,  that 
their  justification  and  salvation  depended 
upon  it;  and  to  introduce  or  to  further 
such  a  persuasion,  would  have  been 
nothing  else  than  undermining  in  them 
the  whole  foundation  of   the  Christian 


231 


religion,  and  giving  them  a  Jewish-Chris- 
tian ceremonial  w,orship,  instead  of  the 
living  faitii  of  Christianity.  Therefore, 
the  apostle  St.  Paul — the  very  same  per- 
son whose  principle  it  was  to  become  to 
the  Jews  a  Jew,  in  order  to  win  the  Jews 
to  Christianity — was  obliged  so  expressly 
to  oppose  himself,  as  a  defender  of  Chris- 
tian freedom,  to  the  Judaizing  teachers, 
who  wished  to  force  the  Jewish  ceremo- 
nial law  on  the  acceptance  of  the  Churches 
formed  from  heathen  converts  also. 

Tlie  Churches,  which  consisted  entirely 
of  Jews,  who,  in  their  Cliristian  faith,  still 
lived  entirely  as  Jews,  must  have  formed 
a  striking  contrast  to  the  Churches  formed 
from  heathen  converts,  in  whom  the  pure 
spiritual  character  of  the  Christian  wor- 
!  ship  was  the  most  prominent  feature,  and 
among  whom  religion  was  connected  with 
no  outward  ceremonies  whatever.  But 
the  communion  of  faith  and  love  was  not 
to  be  broken  in  consequence  of  all  these 
differences  in  the  outward  circumstances 
and  form  of  life;  Christians  of  both  de- 
scents and  classes  were  to  look  upon 
each  other  as  brethren.  Those  vvho  had 
attained  to  the  full  ripeness  of  Christian 
knowledge,  to  tsXeiota?  I»  X^io-tw,  were  to 
bear  with  those,  who  were  not  so  far  ad- 
vanced, in  a  spirit  of  love  and  tenderness, 
in  the  hope  that  God  would  reveal  to 
those  also  in  his  own  time,  those  views 
in  which  they  were  deficient,  if  only  all 
would  endeavour  to  apply  faithfully  to  the 
purposes  of  a  Christian  life  the  measure 
of  knowledge,  which  was  vouchsafed  to 
them.     (Phil.  iii.  15.) 

The  knowledge  of  many  of  the  Jewish 
Christians  was  deficient  also  in  regard  to 
other  things,  besides  the  importance  of 
the  ceremonial  law.  Their  limited  and 
narrow-minded  representations  of  the  na- 
ture of  Christianity,  and  their  limited 
views  as  to  the  person  of  Christ  himself, 
served  admirably  to  go  hand  in  hand.  As 
in  their  opinion  the  difference  between 
the  Gospel  and  the  law  was  only  a  dif- 
ference of  degree,  they  could  also  per- 
ceive between  what  Christ  was,  and  what 
Moses  and  the  Prophets  were,  only  a  dif- 
ference of  degree.  They  knew,  there- 
fore, in  this  point  of  view,  tlie  Messiah 
more  after  the  ffesh  than  after  the  Spirit; 
they  knew  him  rather  as  the  Son  of  Da- 
vid, than  as  the  Son  of  God.  And  yet, 
in  the  first  place,  the  belief  in  Jesus  as 
the  Messiah  was  to  be  a  point  of  union 
for  all,  even  amidst  all  other  diircrences  in 
their  measure  of  Christian  knowledge, 
and  in  their  other  religious  opinions  ;  and 


232 


CHARACTERISTIC    DIFFERENCES. 


from  this  one  point  all  further  develop- 
ment of  Christian  kiiavvletlge  was  to  pro- 
ceed. The  apostles  left  it  to  the  guidance 
of  the  Spirit,  to  lead  all  men  from  this 
one  point  to  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and 
knowledge  of  tlie  Son  of  God. 

But,  although  the  apostles  agreed  in 
their  principles,  as  to  the  relation  of 
Christianity  to  Judaism;  although  the 
apostles  in  Palestine  and  St.  Paul  recog- 
nised each  other  mutually,  as  independent 
fellow-labourers  in  the  same  work,  this 
their  agreement  was,  nevertheless,  not 
acknowledged  by  all,  who  called  them- 
selves their  disciples.  There  were  Jewish- 
Christians,  who  were  not  content  with 
having  toleration  and  tenderness  shown 
to  their  narrow-minded  notions,  but  who 
wished  to  Ibrce  those  notions  on  all 
others,  and  persecuted  every  freer  evan- 
gelical spirit  with  blind  zeal.  These 
men  maintained  most  strictly,  that  no 
person  could  have  an  equal  share  Avith 
the  Jews  in  the  blessings  of  the  Messiah's 
kingdom,  unless  he  received  the  Mosaic 
law  in  all  its  extent :  and  these  were  the 
people  who  endeavoured  to  destroy  the 
foundation  of  Christianity,  laid  by  St. 
Paul  in  tlie  Churches  of  the  heathen 
converts,  and  to  introduce,  instead  of  it, 
doctrines  which  savoured  more  of  Ju- 
daism than  of  Christianity.  They  would 
not,  therefore,  acknowledge  St.  Paul,  who 
opposed  their  influence  so  strongly,  for 
an  apostle.  In  their  opinion,  those  only 
were  apostles  whom  Jesus  himself  had 
instructed  during  his  life  on  earth,  and 
had  placed  in  their  apostolic  calling.  St. 
Peter  and  St.  James*  were  the  pillars  of 
the  Church,  to  which  they  more  parti- 
cularly appealed,  although  they  did  not 
act  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  or  the 
notions  of  those  apostles.  Hence  there 
arose  a  pseudo-Petrian  and  a  pseudo- 
Jacobite  parly  of  Jewisli-Christians.  It 
was  natural  enough  that  the  spirit  of  op- 
position on  one  side  shoidd  call  forth  a 
similar  spirit  on  Ihe  other ;  and  a  party 
of  zealots  among  the  heathen  converts, 
who  prided  themselves  most  haughtily 
on  their  freedom,  as  Christians,  opposed 
themselves  to  these  narrow-minded  Jew- 
ish-Christians, and  would  not  allow  the 
observers  of   the  ceremonial  law  to  be 


*  The  J.imcs,  who  is  known  under  the  name 
of  the  brother  of  tlio  I>ord,  probably  tlie  apostle, 
the  son  of  Alpheus  or  Cleophas;  being  the  rela- 
tion of  Jesus  by  l)lood.  He  was  also  called  his 
brother  by  a  use  of   the  word  in  an  extended 


reckoned  by  any  means  as  genuine  Chris- 
tians :  these  people  vaunted  their  freer 
Gnosis,  and  by  their  contempt  of  the 
Jewish  people,  and  by  their  exaggeration 
of  the  contrast  laid  down  by  St.  Paul, 
between  the  law  and  the  Gospel,  they 
were  in  danger  of  being  seduced  into 
despising  the  Old  Testament  itself  They 
would  acknowledge  Christianity  only  in 
the  mode  in  which  it  was  represented  by 
St.  Paul,  and  St.  Paul  was  to  be  their  only 
apostle.  He,  however,  would  acknowledge 
only  one  Christ  for  all,  and  only  one 
Church  of  Christians  sanctilied  by  Him, 
and  calling  on  their  common  Lord  ;  and 
he  would  know  nothing  of  PauVs  party, 
and  Peter''s  party.  But  still,  where  the 
genuine  evangelical  spirit  and  the  power 
of  love  did  not  quench  these  diffi^rences, 
it  was  necessarily  the  case,  that  this  oppo- 
sition should  be  developed  still  more  dis 
tinctly  as  time  went  on. 

In  the  first  half  of  the  second  century 
we  find  again  the  four  parties,  which  had 
formed  themselves  in  the  apostolic  age. 

1.  The  Jewish  zealots — the  pseudo- 
Petrians. 

2.  The  more  moderate,  and  genuine 
evangelical  Jewish  Christians. 

3.  The  zealots  among  the  heathen  con- 
verts— the  pseudo-Pauline  Christians. 

4.  The  more  moderate  and  genuine 
apostolic  heathen  Christians. 

Among  these  latter  was  Justin  Martyr. 
He  says  in  his  Dialogue  with  Trypho,* 
"  There  are  persons  who  will  have  no 
intercourse  with  those  who  observe  the 
ceremonial  law,  and  will  not  share  the 
hearth  with  them,  and  say  that  they  can- 
not be  saved.  I  do  not  agree  with  these 
persons ;  but  if  the  others,  from  weak- 
ness of  persuasion,  wish  to  observe  as  far 
as  they  can,  even  those  laws  of  Moses, 
which  we  think  were  given  on  account 
of  the  hardness  of  man's  heart ;  if  they 
will  only,  at  the  same  time,  rest  their 
hope  on  Christ,  and  do  that  which  is 
lawful  and  holy  by  its  own  nature,  and  by 
eternal  laws,  and  have  no  hesitation  in 
living  with  other  Christians,  witliout  en- 
deavouring to  compel  them  also  to  the 
observance  of  these  things,  then  we  say, 
that  such  persons  are  to  be  looked  upon 
as  our  brethren  in  all  respects.  But  if 
those  from  among  your  people  (the  Jews) 
who  say  that  they  believe  in  Christ,  com- 
pel those  of  the  heathens,  who  embrace 
the    faith    in    this    same    Christ,   to  live 


*  Ed.  Colon,  p.  200.     [P.  137.  Ed.  Jebb.     P. 
266.  Ed.  Paris.] 


^LIA    CAPITOLINA. 


233 

entirely  according  to  the  law  laid  down  j  time  of  Irenapus  all  those  Christians  of 
by  Moses,  or  else  decline  all  intercourse  Jewish  descent,  who  considered  it  neces- 
with  them,  then  I  cannot  approve  of  such  sary  to  continue  in  the  observance  of  the 
persons  ul  all.  And  yet  I  believe  tliat,  per-;  ceremonial  law,  were  designated  by  the 
haps,  those  who  follow  them  in  the  observ-j  common  name  of  the  sect  of  the  Ebion- 
ance  of  the  ceremonial  law,  if  they  believe  j  ites.  In  regard  to  the  derivation  of  the 
in  Christ  at  the  same  time,  will  be  saved."  j  name,  Tertullian  is  the  first  who  makes 
The  Church  of  Jerusalem,  which  must  mention  of  a  founder  named  Ebion,  and 
have  been  induced  by  the  Jewish  war  to  others  have  followed  him  in  this  account. 
take  refuge  in  Pella  beyond  the  Jordan,*  I  Better  informed  writers,  such  as  Irenaeus 
from  its  origin  till  the  first  half  of  the '  and  Origen,  know  of  no  such  person  ; 
second  century,  consisted  entirely  of  I  and  it  is  clear  that  the  invention  of  such 
Christians  of  Jewish  descent,  who,  there-  a  person  only  arose  from  the  not  under- 
fore,  unitedly  continued  in  the  observance  '  standing  the  name  of  Ebionite.  Origen 
of  the  ceremonial  law.  By  means  of  this  gives  us  the  proper  derivation  of  the  term, 
outward  bond  thf^y  were  all  united  to-  „amely,  from  the  Hebrew  tV2X  (Ebion) 
ffether,  whatever  difierences  besidesjnight  '  u   »  .1  • ,»      i,-  u  ,„^   a^A 

ft     ^    '       .       ,    .  1     .  •     Jpoor:    but  the  meannig  which  w-e  find 

be  lound  ni    their  opinions  on  doctrinal ;  \,    1    ^    1  *    .u  i    i     t-      .u„*  ;^  t^ 

...       ,.   .'         ,.         .  .  ,  !  attributed  to  the  word  hy  him,  that  is  to 

points  and  their  rehgmus  dispositions.       t  ^^  containing  a  reference  to  the  po- 

was  a  peculiar  circumstance  of  an  out-l    /^^^  ^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^^  conceptions  and 

ward  nature  which  first  caused  a  separa-      ,•   ^u  ■     r  m  *       ,..   »    ,.^c<,;ki.r  k«  tv,^ 
,  ,      „  1        II       of    their   faith,*  cannot   possibly  be  the 

t.on  amongs    them      In  fact,  when  Ha-,  ^  j  ^^^^^^.       ^^  ^he^term,  for  they 

dnan  was  induced  by  the  rebellion  of  the  ;  ^j^^-^^^^,^^^^  gave  their  own  sect  this  name, 
Jews  under  Barchochab  to  prohibit  them  ,  ^^^  ^^       ^j^^^j^  ^^,^^jj  ^^^  j^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^. 

entirely  from  setting  foot  on  the  ^^^M^^x.es  ix^,.me\vhichv^ovMhe?.  re^ro^i.-h 
and  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  since  ,  ^^  ^j^^^^^      g^^^  ^^^^^  -j.  ^^  ^^^^  ^^^^ 

they  generally  drew  upon  themselves  the  ° 

jealousy  of  the  Roman  governors,  it  was 
natural  enough  that  the  Christian  Church, 
which  apparently  had  returned  back  to 
Jerusalem  in  this  interval,!  should  wish 
to  escape  being  confounded  with  the 
Jews.  Those,  therefore,  who  were  re- j 
strained  by  religious  scruples  from  doing 
what  might  enable  them  to  attain  this 
object,  were  obliged  to  separate  them- 
selves from  the  rest.  The  others  joined 
themselves  with  Christians  of  heathen 
descent,  and  formed  with  them  a  Church 
in  the  heathen  colony,  ^lia  Capitolina, 
which  had  arisen  on  the  site  of  old  Jeru- 
salem, and  in  this  Church  the  ceremonial 
law  was  entirely  abandoned-^ 

We  often  find  it  the  case  in  the  history 
of  sects,  that  people  describe  under  one 
common  name  sects  which  are  really  dif- 
ferent, but  agree  witli  one  another  in  some 


name  was  given  them  by  others,  and  by 
such  as  were  of  sentiments  hostile  to  their 
sect,  Avho  were  the  persons  who  would 
have  branded  them  Avith  this  name  under- 
stood in  this  sense  }  Could  it  be  Chris- 
tians of  heathen  descent  ?  These  might, 
indeed,  have  applied  the  name  to  them  in 
this  very  signification ;  but  then  we  can 
hardly  imagine  that  they  Avould  have 
chosen  an  Hebreto  name.  Or  was  it  the 
Jews,  who  were  angry  at  Christianity  in 
general }  This  might  be  possible,  if  we 
modify  in  some  degree  the  notion  of 
poverty  of  thought,  after  the  idea  of  a  very 
acute  inquirer,  who  has  recently  distin- 
guished himself  in  this  walk  of  know- 

*   Origen,  t  xvi. ;   Matt.  xii.    Tec    i^ioDium  ksu 
TTToe^ii/cvTi  TTipi  T;)V  ik  'Jn^cuv  TTicnt)/.     Origen  can 


hardly  mean  in  this  place  to  give  an  etymological 
.  explanation  ;  but  he  is  only  making  an  allusion 

points,  without  remarking  the  points  of,  ;„  \^\^  own  way  to  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
difference  between  them,  so  that  they  1  However,  in  the  hook  c.  Celsum,  ii.  c.  1,  he  says 
attribute  to  all  these  sects  what  may  justly  :  expressly,  i^aiw^uo/  tw  »aTa  tm  ixJi^xnv  Trruxti^  too 
be  said  only  of  one  or  other  of  tliem.  """" 
This  was  the  case  here  also ;  from  the 


•  Euseb.  iii.  5. 

f  Epiphanius  de  mensuriset  pondcribus,  c.  1.5. 

i  Sec  Euseb.  iv.  6,  and  the  remarkable  words 
of  Sulpicius  Scvcrus,  after  he  has  quoted  that 
prohibition  of  Hadrian;  Hist.  Sacr.  ii..31.  "Quod 
quJdem  Christiana;  fidei  proficiebat,  quia  turn  poene 

omnes   Christum   Deum   sub   legis   observatione  j  least  it  is  certain  there  was  no  such  founder  of  a 
credebant."  '  sect  as  Ebion." — H.  J.  R.] 

3  m2 


[In  Neander's  earlier  work,  Genetische  En 
twickelung  der  Vornchmsten  Gnostischen  Sys- 
teme,  Berhn,  1818,  there  is  a  long  appendix  on 
the  subject  of  the  Pseudo-Clementine  Homilies, 
and  on  the  Ebionites.  In  Burton's  Bampton 
Lectures,  note  80,  the  authorities  may  be  found 
by  whom  the  existence  and  the  non-existence  of 
Ebion  are  respectively  supported.  Matter,  Hist, 
du    Gnosticisme,   vol.   ii.  p.  320,  says,  that  "at 


234 


EBIONITES. — ORIGIN    OF   THE    NAME. 


ledge,  *and  if,  putting  the  word  into  the 
mouth  of  those  Jews  who  expected  a 
Messiah  to  come  in  visible  glory^  we 
imagine  them  to  designate  by  this  name 
the  faith  in  a  poor  and  crucified  Messiah. 
And  yet  this  meaning,  taken  by  itself, 
does  not  appear  to  be  tlie  simplest  nor  the 
most  natural;  for  even  this  learned  writer 
himself  connects  this  meaning  with  one 
we  are  about  to  mention.  If  we  follow 
the  interpretation  of  the  name  which  we 
find  in  the  later  Ebionites  of  Epiphanius, 
it  originally  denoted  a  class  of  poor  men. 
This  may  have  been  applied  to  them 
either  as  consisting  of  poor  persons  of 
the  lower  orders^  whom  none  of  the  rich 
and  the  learned  had  joined  (see  John 
vii.  49,)  a  reproach  which  the  heathens 
made  to  the  Christians,!  and  which 
the  proud  and  the  wise  in  their  own 
opinion  have  constantly  made  to  the  dis- 
ciples of  simple  truth  ;  or  they  may  have 
been  persons  who  had  voluntarily  re- 
nounced all  earthly  property,  and  volun- 
tarily given  up  all  this  earth's  wealth,  in 
order  that  they  might  devote  their  whole 
life  to  Divine  things  ;  and  in  this  case  we 
should  be  reminded  of  a  similar  name  in 
the  case  of  later  sects.J  The  latter  idea 
corresponds  the  most  nearly  with  the 
explanation  given  by  the  later  Ebionites 
themselves  in  Epiphanius ;  for  they  ap- 
pealed to  the  conduct  of  their  ancestors 
in  laying  down  all  their  goods  at  the  feet 
of  the  apostles.  Jn  truth,  however,  this 
is  no  decisive  proof,  for  we  may  certaiidy 
imagine  it  possible  that  these  later  Ebion- 
ites had  introduced  a  meaning  into  the 
term  which  was  foreign  to  its  original 
sense.  According  to  either  of  these  ex- 
planations this  appellation  may  have  been 
originally  a  general  name  of  the  Chris- 
tians in  Jerusalem,  or  it  may  have  been 
from  the  very  beginning  the  name  of  a 
certain  ascetic  sect  among  the  Jewish 
Christians,  which  the  Church  teachers 
afterwards  extended  by  mistake  tq  all 
Judaizing  Christians.  Such  an  appella- 
tion, in  such  a  sense,  suits  admirably  the 
spirit  of  the  ascetic  Ebionites,  who  paint 
themselves  to  us  in  the  apocryphal  book 
called  the  Clementines  ;§  for  in  that  book. 


*  Dr.  Gieselcr,  in  Staiidlin  and  Tzschirner's  Ar- 
chive for  Ancient  and  Modern  Ecclesiastical  His- 
tory, iv.  Band.     Second  Part,  p.  307. 

■j-  See  page  4 1 . 

4   Huniiliati,  pauperes  dc  Lugduno. 

§  [In  Neandcr's  Genetische  Entwickelunpr, 
&c.,  lie  says,  p.  367,  "although  all  the  opinions 
which  the  first  Fathers,  who  have  given  us  hut 
very  scanty  notices  of  the  Ebionites,  attributed  to 
them,  are  not  to  be  found  in  him  (the  author  d 


according  to  the  contrast  hetween  the  king- 
dom of  God  and  the  kingdom  of  Sata7i^ 
tohich  they  misunderstood,  (as  if  the  whole 
earthly  world,  not  merely  in  regard  to  its 
sinful  misuse,  but  of  itself  and  by  its  very 
nature,  necessarily  belonged  to  Satan  ;)  in 
this  book  we  find  it  required  of  those  who 
wish  to  belong  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  that 
they  should  renounce  as  far  as  possible 
all  possessions  in  a  world  which  was  none 
of  theirs,  but  which  belonged  to  Satan  ; 
that  they  should  possess  nothing  but  what 
was  absolutely  necessary  to  their  bare  sub- 
sistence, that  they  should  only  possess 
bread,  water,  and  one  garb,  and  even  these 
necessaries  of  life  they  should  obtain  by 
the  sweat  of  their  brow.* 

Many  among  these  Judaizing  Christians 
had  brought  their  carnal  Jewish  habits  of 
thought  with  them  into  Christianity,  and 
they  had  thus  only  applied  the  common 
Jewish  representation  of  the  3Iessiah  to 
Jesus.  According  to  this  representation 
they  considered  him  a  man,  like  other 
men,  who  had  been  chosen  as  Messiah  by 
a  peculiar  decree  of  God's  counsel,  so- 
lemnly dedicated  to  this  office  by  Elias, 
that  is,  according  to  their  notions,  by  John 
who  represented  Elias,  and  at  this  mo- 
ment had  been  furnished  with  the  Divine 
power  requisite  for  the  accomplishment 
of  his  office.  This  was  the  only  class 
of  Ebionites  known  to  Irenseus,  and  they 
appear  to  us  as  the  offspring  of  those 
old  Jewish  opponents  of  St.  Paul.  Like 
them,  these  Ebionites  considered  circum- 
cision as  an  indispensable  condition  to  a 
perfect  participation  in  the  kingdom  of 
God  :  the  earthly  Jerusalem  was  still  to 
them  the  true  city  of  God.,  and  they  abused 
St.  Paul  as  an  apostate  from  the  law.j 


the  Clementines,)  yet  he  belongs  far  more  to  this 
class  of  Judaizing  Christains  than  to  the  class  of 
the  Nazarenes.''  He  therefore,  considers  the  work 
written  by  a  man  of  Ebionitish  views.  See  also 
Matter,  Hist,  du  Gnosticisme,  vol.  ii.  p.  329. 
— H.  J.  R] 

*   Clemcntin.  Homil.  15.  c.  7,  8,  9. 

f  IrensEUs,  i.  26,  and  alibi.  I  am  no  longer  so 
strongly  of  the  opinion,  that  the  difTicult  passage, 
"  Quae  autcm  sunt  prophetica,  curiosius  exponere 
nituntur,"  is  to  be  understood  after  the  ideas  of 
the  Clementine,  of  a  too  subtile  investigation  into 
the  meaning  of  true  prophecies,  as  I  endeavoured 
to  show  in  my  book  on  the  Gnostics,  p.  391 ;  for 
only  the  common  sort  of  Ebionites,  whose  no- 
tions were  entirely  those  of  carnal-minded  Jews, 
aj)pcar  to  have  been  known  to  IrensEUs ;  and  the 
idea  brought  forward  in  the  Clementine,  of  true 
and  false  prophecies,  would  be  qui'e  foreign  to 
their  spirit.  We  can  say  nothing  more  than  that 
Irena;us  found  himself  at  a  loss  among  interpre- 
tations of  the  prophets  after  the  Jewish  Rabbinic 


The  mild  manner  in  which  Justin 
Martyr  speaks  of  these  opinions  of  the 
Ebionites  on  the  person  of  Jesus,*  is 
wortliy  of  observation  :  — '"  There  are 
some,"  lie  says,  "of  our  people,  who 
acknowledge  him  to  be  the  Messiah,  and 
yet  consider  him  a  man,  born  of  men ; 
with  wliom  I  do  not  agree:  and  the 
greater  number  also,  being  of  my  opinion, 
do  not  say  this ;  for  we  are  commanded 
by  Christ  not  to  follow  the  doctrines  of 
men,  but  to  hold  that  which  has  been 
proclaimed  by  the  holy  prophets,  and 
taught  by  him."t  Thus  OrigenJ  sees  in 
the  Ebionites  weaker  brethren,  who  did 
not  reject  Christ,  who  was  their  Messiah, 
and  to  whom  they  looked  for  all  assist- 
ance; although  they  recognised  in  him 
only  the  Son  of  David,  and  not  the  Son 
of  God.  He  gives  a  very  pretty  allego- 
rical turn  to  the  account  of  the  blind  man 
in  Mark  x.  46 ;  he  makes  the  blind  man, 
who  calls  on  Jesus,  an  Ebioiiile,  and  the 
multitudes  around,  who  commanded  him 
to  hold  his  peace,  believers  from  among 
the  heathen  converts,  who  generally  held 
the  more  exalted  notions  in  regard  to  the 
person  of  the  Messiah ;  and  he  then  con- 
tinues thus:  "But  although  the  multi- 
tudes commanded  him  to  be  silent,  yet  he 
cried  the  more,  because  he  believed  in 
Jesus,  although  his  faith  was  of  an  hu- 
man kind  ;§  and  he  cried  out  aloud,  and 
said  to  him,  '  Son  of  David !  have  mercy 
on  me.' " 

How  different  would  many  things  have 
been,  if  men,  in  this  spirit  of  love  and 
freedom,  had  always  allowed  the  grace 
of  the  Redeemer  to  fall  on  all  u-ho  call 
upon  him !  if  they  had  ahcays  taken  into 
their  account  the  various  stages  in  tlte 
Christian  progress  up  to  the  ripeness  of 
manhood  in  the  faith,  and  had  not  wished  \ 
to  force  different  spirits  all  at  once  into 

method,  which  were  in  vogue  among  the  Ebion- 
ites, but  entirely  at  variance  with  the  usual  Chris- 
tian methods  of  interpretation,  and,  therefore,  that 
he  took  occasion  to  accuse  them  as  hypocritical 
subtilties. 

*  It  is  at  least  probable,  although  not  certain, 
that  he  had  the  Ebionites  here  in  his  thoughts; 
hut,  notwithstanding,  they  arc  not  mentioned  by 
l)ini  at  all  as  a  peculiar  sect.  The  reading  utto  tm 
ti/ui^ip'.u  yc/c-ji;,  does  not,  therefore,  appear  to  me 
suspicious.  Not  only  the  authority  of  manu- 
scripts, but  the  antithesis  to  the  phrase,  nu  yivcu; 
vfjteev,  which  precedes,  appears  to  support  this 
reading. 

t  Dial.  c.  Tryphon.  Jud.  §  48.  [P.  142.  Ed. 
Jebb:  p.  267.  Ed.  Par.] 

t   Matt.  t.  xvi.  c.  12. 

§    II/3-Ta/W    fAit   iTTl   T6»  'UlTCUV,    v.y6^arroutTifi!.f    Si 


EBIONITES.  235 

the  same  measure  and  degrees !  But  even 
Origen  considered  the  Ebionites  as  here- 
tics against  St.  Paul,  and  as  persons  who 
were  but  little  dillerent  from  Jews.* 

Frenaius  judged  all  Ebionites  together, 
by  those  of  u)ho/n  he  had  heard,  and  attri- 
buted to  all  the  same  ideas  with  regard  to 
the  person  of  Jesus.  On  the  contrary, 
Origen,  a  man  of  more  accurate  investiga- 
tion, who  had  been  iij  Palestine  himself, 
distinguishes  the  Ebionites  into  two 
classes ;  of  which  one  denied  the  miracu- 
lous birth  of  Jesus,  and  the  other  admitted 
it.|  We  may  see  from  this  difference  hav- 
ing been  overlooked  by  earlier  writers, 
how  easy  it  was  to  overlook  the  dif- 
ferences in  opinion  between  different 
branches  of  the  same  party.  It  is  not 
unlikely  that  those  who  acknowledged 
the  supernatural  operations  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  at  the  birth  of  Jesus,  and  considered 
his  birth  as  a  miracle  which  stood  forth 
from  the  chain  of  usual  human  events, 
supposed  also  a  certain  original  union  of 
God  or  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  with  the  hu- 
man nature  of  Jesus, — and  then  they 
would  already  have  retreated  farther  from 
the  opinions  of  the  narrow-minded  Jews, 
and  more  nearly  approached  those  of  the 
Christians,  because  they  did  not  make  the 
peculiar  operation  of  the  Divine  Spirit  on 
the  man  Jesus  begin  all  at  once,  at  one 
definite  moment  of  his  life ;  namely,  the 
season  of  his  consecration  to  the  office  oi 
Messiah,  by  John  ;  but  instead  of  isolating 
the  human  nature  of  Christ,  tliey  allowed 
that  it  developed  itself  from  the  very  be- 
ginning, in  union  with  God;  and  from  the 
very  beginning  they  made  a  very  essential 
difference  between  Christ  and  the  other 
organs  of  God  among  men. 

In  the  representation  of  the  Ebionites 
given  by  Epiphanius,+  we  actually  find 
some  who  believed  in  the  higher  nature 
of  the  Messiah,  and  busied  themselves  in 
speculations  upon  it.  One  party  of  them 
recognised  in  the  appearance  of  Jesus, 
from  the  very  beginning,  a  spirit  of  an 
higher  kind,  which  could  not  proceed 
from  the  chain  of  the  natural  progress  and 
development  of  human  nature  ; — that 
pure  outpouring  of  the  Divine  Spirit  (the 
original  form  of  human  nature)  which 
first  existed  in  the  person  of  Adam,  and 
then  again  appeared  on  earth,  at  various 


*  Jerem.    Homil.  xviii.    c.    12.      TvTTourt  tov 

(Ja-C.irTOA.CV  ']»3-iU    X^ITTCU  Xt^J/C  Sui7-<plt/U'A(.         Mstt.  t 

xi.  B.  12.      'Oxtya  JuKft^cvTn;  Tcty  '\<,vJoua>t. 
-j-  Origen  c.  Celsum,  v.  c.  61. 
i  Haeres.  30, 


236  THE    CLEMENTIXE. EPIPHANIUS. 

times,    as    the    renovator  of   fallen   hu-  ;  certain  attachment  to  the  ceremonial  law  ; 

manitv  ;  until  at  last  it  returned  in  the  per-  i  and  they  are  as  different  from  his  other 
'    ■     ""      ...  .  ^    •         "    usual   antagonists,  as  those   Ebionites  of 

Epiphanius,  to  whom  the  author  of  the 
Clementine  belonged,  were  from  those 
usually  called  Ebionites,  which  was  the 
only  party  known  under  that  name  to  the 
older  Fathers  of  the  Church.  We  recog- 
nise here  one  peculiar  family  of  the  Ju- 
daizing  Christians  ;  the  seed  of  which,  as 
well  as  of  the  common  sort  of  Ebionites, 
is  to  be  sought  in  the  apostolic  age*. 

If  we  compare  the  Clementine  with  the 
accounts  in  Epiphanius,  the  example  of  this 
sect  will  make  it  very  clear,  how  people 
of  this  kind  might  have  so  inward  a  feeling 
of  religion  in  one  point  of  view,  while  in 
another  they  adhered  so  closely  to  its  out- 
ward things  :  on  the  one  hand  might  prize 
so  highly  an  authority  given  by  God,  while 
on  the  other  they  subjected  it  so  capri- 
ciously to  the  theosophic  system  esta- 
bJlshed  in  their  schools,  and  separated  at 
the  dictates  of  their  own  will,  whatever 
did  not  suit  their  ideas. 

They  supposed  a  simple  original  reli- 
gion, which  that  first  pure  man,  who  re- 
ceived the  immediate  outpouring  of  the 
Divine  Spirit  in  his  heart,  and  learnt  from 
it  all  divine  truth,  had  in  the  first  instance 
delivered  to  his  children.  This  religion 
was  to  be  always  propagated  pure  and 
unmixed,  by  means  of  oral  transmission ; 
it  did  not,  however,  maintain  its  purity,  but 
was  constantly  adulterated  more  and  more 
by  the  interspersion  of  the  evil  principle. 
Many  new  institutions,  proceeding  from 
God,  were,  therefore,  needed  to  purify  the 
original  religion  from  these  adulterations. 
Moses  was  one  of  the  restorers  of  this 
original  religion ;  it  was  to  be  spread  by 
oral  delivery,  and  thus  it  was  also  to  be 
constantly  propagated  among  a  number  of 
initiated  people.  But  when  the  revelations 
of  God  imparted  by  Moses  were  set  down 
in  Scripture,  many  errors  mixed  themselves 
up  with  it,  being  strewn  among  them  by 


son  of  the  Messiah,  in  order  to  bring  all 
children  to  himself,  and  to  raise  them 
with  himself  to  the  eternal  kingdom, 
where  he  will  repose  with  them  forever 
from  all  his  wanderings,  and  all  his 
cares.  This  is  the  same  doctrine  which 
is  found  in  the  apocryphal  book  of 
the  Clementines,  from  which  we  have 
been  able  in  this  representation,  to  fill 
up  the  account  of  Epiphanius.  The 
othws  adopted  the  common  Jewish  idea, 
that  Jesus  was  first  invested  with  Divine 
powers,  while  yet  merely  a  man,  only 
at  his  solemn  consecration  to  the  office 
of  Messiah.  But,  instead  of  the  inde- 
finite notion  of  Divine  power,  they  ima- 
gined a  Spirit  elevated  above  all  angels, 
the  highest  representation  of  God ;  and, 
according  to  them,  this  was  the  real  hea- 
venly Messiah*  who  united  himself  with 
the  man  Jesus,  as  his  instrument,  at  his 
baptism,  and  effected  every  thing  through 
him. 

It  may  be  said,  that  we  cannot  judge  of 
those  older  Ebionites  by  the  Ebionites  of 
the  fourth  century,  mentioned  in  Epipha- 
nius, for  these  latter  may  have  appropri- 
ated to  themselves,  in  latter  times,  notions 
quite  foreign  to  their  original  dispositions, 
by  intercourse  with  many  other  theo- 
sophico-ascetic  sects :  but  then  these 
notions  bear  completely  the  stamp  of  a 
far  more  ancient  Jewish  theosophy  ;  and 
their  agreement  with  the  ideas  of  the  Cle- 
mentine bespeaks  a  higher  antiquity ;  for 
the  Clementine,  at  least  in  its  groundwork 
certainly  cannot  come  to  us  from  a  later  pe- 
riod than  the  second  century.  Nor  can  we 
be  surprised  at  finding  theosophico-ascetic 
dispositions  among  the  Judaizing  Chris- 
tians :  for  there  were  many  sects  of  that 
kind  among  the  Jews,  who  united  a  cer- 
tain attachment  to  the  ceremonial  law 
with  these  dispositions,  and  many  of 
whom  would  be  attracted  by  Christianity 
in  some  one  point  of  view,  without  being 

able  to  receive  it  quite  pure,  and  by  itself,       *  Only  Methodius,  who  lived  at  the  end  of  the 
and  would,  therefore,  endeavour  to  amal-    third  and  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  ap- 


gamate  it  with  their  earlier  habits  of 
tho\ight.  And  although  we  usually  find 
St.  Paul  engaged  in  controversy  with 
Jews,  of  entirely  gross  and  carnal  habits 
of  thought,  which  were  only  directed  to 
earthly  views,  yet,  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  his  adversaries  are  those  Ju- 
daizing and  false  teachers,  who  united  a 
theosophico-ascetic    disposition    with    a 


pears  to  have  known  them,  when  he  says  of  them, 
(Symposion  Decern  Virgin.  BibUothec.  Gnecor. 
Patr.  auctor.  noviss.  T.  i.  Paris,  1672,  fol.  113,) 
that  they  had  denied  the  inspiration  of  tlie  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  Prophets,  and  maintained  that  they 
wrote  only  i^  icTwc  xm^rmi; ;  and  although  we  can- 
not here  with  certainty  recognise  the  whole  of  the 
Clementine  notion  of  prophecy,  it  is  at  least  cer- 
tain, that  he  speaks  of  persons,  who,  unlike  the  usual 
.lews  of  a  Pharisaic  cast,  very  much  lowered  the 
authority  oftlie  Prophets,  and  would  not  acknow- 
ledge their  writings  to  be  inspired  in  the  same  de- 
gree as  the  Pentateuch. 


PURE    RIOSAISM   ONE    WITH   THE    GOSPEL. 


237 


tlie  evil  principle,  as  God  permitted,  in 
order  to  try  in  mankind  their  sense  of 
divine  thintrs,  and  their  love  to  God,  by 
their  separation  of  the  truth  from  falsehood, 
and  their  rejection  of  every  thing  which 
opposed  the  pure  idea  of  God.  (Under 
this  head  was  reckoned  every  passage  in 
which  God  lets  himself  down  to  the  notions 
of  liumanity  in  order  to  instruct  mankind, 
and  is  represented  after  an  anthopopaihi- 
cal  manner,*  as  well  as  all  that  related  to 
the  sacrifice  of  victims.)  "But  the  mass  of 
carnal-minded  Jews  did  not  know  how  to 
distinguish  the  original  Mosaism  from 
these. adulterating  additions.  And  then 
that  pure  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
the  Foreljither  of  the  human  race,  out  of 
love  to  his  children  scattered  over  the 
whole  earth,  was  impelled  to  appear  again 
on  eardi  in  the  person  of  Jesus,  in  order 
to  purify  the  original  religion  from  the 
additions  which  deformed  it.  He  himself 
points  out  this  object  of  his  appearance, 
when  he  says.  Matt.  v.  17,  "  Ye  must  not 
imagine  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the 
law,  but  to  fulfil  it."t  That  which  he 
destroyed  cannot  belong  to  that  which  he 
called  the  law,  cannot  belong  to  that  ori- 
ginal religion.^  He  appeared  particularly 
for  the  purpose  also  of  extending  his 
blessings  over  the  rest  of  his  children,  the 
heathen,  of  imparting  that  original  religion 
also  to  them,  which  had  been  always  pro- 
pagated among  the  initiated§.  The  doc- 
trine of  Christ  is,  therefore,  entirely  one 
with  the  pure  original  Mosaism.  The 
Jewish  Mystic,  an  Essene,  or  something 
of  the  same  kind,  converted  to  Chris- 
tianity, did  not  need  to  receive  any  new 
doctrines ;  the  doctrine  of  Christ  was  to 
him  only  a  ratification  of  his  earlier  theory 
of  religion,  and  he  was  only  delighted  to 


*  Although  in  the  author  of  the  Clementine  a 
lively  eastern  power  of  imagination  prevailed  too 
strongly  over  the  powers  of  conception,  to  allow 
him  to  form  to  himself  a  pure  spiritual  idea  of  God, 
he  himself  looked  on  God  as  an  higher  Being, 
of  radiant  appearance  in  a  human  form.  ["  Ein 
hoheres  Lichtwesen  in  menschlicher  gestalt." — 
Geum.] 

[The  word  I  have  translated  powers  of  concep. 
timi  is  "  begriffsvermogen."  It  must  be  remem- 
bered that  Bcgriff.  means  an  abstract  idea.  See 
the  Preface.— H.  J.  R.] 

■}•  The  words  twc  5r/ic<f>;)Taf  are  here  capriciously 
left  out,  because  this  sect  did  not  acknowledge  the 
Divine  illumination  of  the  prophets,  and  saw  in 
them,  in  fact,  only  the  propagators  of  many  errors — 
as,  for  instance,  of  the  error  of  an  earthly  political 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah.  > 

i  Clementin,  Homil.  iii.  51. 

§   Tst    L?r    itlttvd!    iv    KfuTTTii    c^i'jit  7r!t^aJiS'.y.na.  \ 


find  that  the  secret  doctrines  had  been 
made  known  for  the  common  good  of  all 
mankind,  which  he  had  never  before 
thought  possible.  He  saw  in  Jesus  a  new 
appearance  of  that  Adam  w,hom  he  had 
always  honoured  as  the  source  of  all  that 
is  true  and  Divine  in  human  nature.  Only 
a  father  could  love  his  children  as  Jesus 
loved  mankind  :  '•  But  what  gave  him  most 
sorrow  was,  that  he  was  opposed  from 
ignorance  by  those  for  whom  he  was 
struggling,  as  for  his  own  children,  and 
yet  he  loved  those  who  hated  him, — and 
yet  he  wept  over  their  disobedience, — and 
yet  he  blessed  them  that  blasphemed  him  ; 
and  yet  he  prayed  for  his  enemies  •  and 
all  this  he  did,  not  only  as  a  father  him- 
self, but  he  taught  his  disciples  also  to  con- 
duct themselves  towards  other  men  as 
their  brethren.""* 

The  following  conclusion  would  be 
deduced  from  this :  one  and  the  same 
original  religion  is  in  pure  Mosaism,  and 
in  Christianity;  lie  who  has  the  former 
can  dispense  with  the  latter,  and  he  who 
has  the  latter  can  very  well  dispense  with 
the  former;  at  least  if  the  Jew  will  not 
blaspheme  Christ,  whom  he  knows  not, 
nor  the  Christian  Moses,  whom  he  also 
knows  not.  The  doctrine  is  given  by 
God,  and  man  has  received  it  without  any 
of  his  own  co-operation,  and  all  depends 
on  this,  whether  the  Jew  practises  what 
Moses  commands,  and  the  Christian  what 
Christ  appoints.  Christianity  is  also  here 
(in  this  system)  only  the  doctrine  of 
another  law ;  the  author  of  the  Clemen- 
tine, like  many  other  ascetics  and  mystics, 
had  experienced  nothing  of  the  opposi- 
tion between  this  law  of  God  and  the  law 
of  sin  in  human  nature, — of  the  gulf  be- 
tween the  acknowledgment  of  this  law, 
and  the  loving  and  perfecting  it, — or  of 
the  diflerence  between  the  letter  that 
kills,  and  the  Spirit  that  makes  alive  ;  and 
therefore,  he  was  unable  to  recognise  the 
real  diflerence  between  Mosaism  (of  which 
he  had  formed  an  entirely  arbitrary  no- 
tionj  and  Christianity — that  is  to  say,  the 
real,  peculiar,  fundamental  nature  of  Chris- 
tianity. He  says,  in  fact,  "  There  would 
have  been  no  need  for  the  appearance, 
either  of  Moses  or  of  Christ,  if  men 
would  have  chosen  to  acknowledge  what 
is  right  of  themselves.*'!  Which  means, 
'  if  they  would  have  suffered  themselves 
to  be  brought  to  a  proper  understanding 


*  Homil.  iii.  19. 

■\  Horn.  viiL    6.    Ei.r^  d<p"  isLvrav  to  luKiyc 


238 


THE   NAZARENES — JUDAISM — GNOSTICISM. 


of  the  original  religion,  by  means  of  that 
part  of  their  own  nature  which  is  akin  to 
the  Divine.' 

He  perverts  in  a  remarkable  manner 
those  glorious  words  of  Christ,  Matt.  xi. 
25,  which  require  childlike  resignation 
and  simplicity.*  He  finds  nothing  in  this 
passage  more  than  that  God  had  hidden 
the  Divine  Teacher,  Jesus,  from  the  wise 
among  the  Jews,  who  knew  already  from 
Moses  what  they  had  to  do,  as  he  had,  on 
the  contrary,  revealed  him  to  the  heathen, 
who  did  not  yet  know,  how  they  ought 
to  live.t 

In  the  Clementine  a  certain  asceticism 
is  recommended,  and  yet  at  the  same 
time  the  holiness  of  the  marriage  state  is 
maintained,  and  to  mislead  mankind  to 
celibacy  is  represented  as  the  mark  of  a 
false  prophet.  Now  this  appears  as  a 
characteristic  mark  of  the  Ebionites  also 
in  Epiphanius,  and  the  comparison  of 
these  two  accounts  shows  that  this  dispo- 
sition in  the  Ebionites  did  not  arise  after- 
wards out  of  opposition  to  the  monkery 
of  the  predominant  Church,  but  that  we 
are  to  recognise  the  original  Hebraism  in 
it,  and  therefore,  it  may  have  been  a  trait 
common  to  the  different  Ebionitish  sects. 
Traces  of  the  enmity  of  the  Judaizing 
parties  to  celibacy  are  to  be  found  as  early 
as  the  time  of  St.  Paul.  See  his  first 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  chap.  vii. 

In  these  Clementine  Ebionites  there 
are  also  symptoms  of  a  Judaizing  sect, 
/vhich  although  it  could  only  consider 
the  apostle  St.  Paul,  who  opposed  so 
strongly  their  doctrine  of  the  identity 
of  Mosaism  and  Christianity,  and  other 
ideas  peculiar  to  themselves,  in  the  light 
of  a  perverter  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ, 
was  yet  mildly  disposed  towards  the 
heathen,  and  by  no  means  wished  to 
force  the  ceremonial  law  upon  them.  In 
Jerome,  on  the  contrary,  under  the  name 
of  JS'azarcne  (the  original  name  given  to 
all  Christians  by  the  Jews,  see  Acts  xxiv. 
5,)  we  find  the  descendants  of  those 
Jewish  Christians  of  a  genuine  evangelic 
disposition,  who  would  not  allow  the 
existence  of  any  contradiction  between 
the  apostles,  the  same  people,  of  whom 
we  found  the  last  trace  in  Justin  Martyr, 
(see  above.)  They  pointedly  combated 
the  regulations  and  the  ceremonial  wor- 

*  As  we  usually  find  in  the  Apocryphal  Gos- 
pels, he  certainly  robs  these  words  in  some  degree 
of  their  simplicity,  because  he  quotes  the  words 
(r(,<f(rv  with  the  addition  of  7riiiT0urt^ctv.  To  vnmu! 
ho  adds  6)iX3(<^(M/o-/v. 

I  Horn.  viii.  6. 


ship  of  the  Pharisees ;  and  while  they 
themselves  observed  the  ceremonial  law, 
they  did  not  force  it  on  the  heathen. 
They  acknowledged  the  Apostle  Paul  as 
a  teacher  of  Divine  wisdom,  whom  God 
had  peculiarly  chosen  for  his  instrument, 
for  the  purpose  of  bringing  the  tidings  of 
salvation  to  the  heathen  nations.  They 
lamented  the  unbelief  of  their  own  peo- 
ple, and  longed  for  the  time  when  they 
also  should  be  converted  to  the  Lord, 
whom  they  had  crucified,  and  renounce 
all  their  idols.  Then  nothing  would  be 
done  by  the  power  of  man,  but  every 
thing  which  Satan  set  up  in  opposition  to 
the  kingdom  of  God,  would  fall  down  by 
the  power  of  God,  and  all  who  had 
hitherto  pleased  themselves,  in  the  fancy 
of  their  own  wisdom,  would  be  converted 
to  the  Lord.  They  thought  that  they 
found  this  promise  in  the  prophecies  of 
Isaiah  (xxxi.  7,  8.)*  The  conclusion 
which  we  are  entitled  to  draw  clearly 
from  all  this  is,  that  from  the  very  times 
of  the  apostles  various  sorts  of  Jew- 
ish Christians  spread  themselves  abroad, 
which  people  have  been  led  into  confu- 
sion with  each  other  by  the  common 
names  which  were  given  to  them. 

(b.)  Tlie  Sects  which  arose  from  the  mixture 
oftlie  wiental  Theosophy  with  Cliristianity. 

1.  The  Gnostic  Sects. 

(a.)    General  remarks  on  their  origin,  cha- 
racter, and  differences. 

We  pass  from  the' Judaizing  sects  to 
the  Gnostics,  who,  proceeding  from  07ie 
common  stock  with  the  former,  deve- 
loped themselves  afterwards  in  a  manner 
which  set  the  two  parties  in  a  constantly 
increasing  opposition.  If  we  contemplate 
the  characteristics  of  both  dispositions 
pushed  to  the  extreme,  we  cannot  con- 
ceive a  stronger  opposition  than  that  be- 
tween the  narrow  and  carnal  disposition 
of  Judaism,  which  cleaves  to  outward 
things,  and  comprehends  every  thing  only 
after  the  senses, — and  the  spirit  of  Gnos- 
ticism, which  gives  itself  up  to  unbridled 
license  in  its  speculation  on  I)ivine  mat- 
ters, despising  the  letter,  idealizing  every 
thing,  and  striving  to  reach  beyond  the 
limits  of  earthly  existence  and  the  mate- 
rial world;  and  yet,  just  as  one  is  often 
led  to  observe,  that  dispositions,  which 
in  our  conceptions  are  widely  opposed, 
really  are  connected  together  in  the  out- 


*  Hieronymi  commentar.  in  lesaiam.  ed.  Mar- 
tianay,  t.  iii.  p.  79,  83,  250,  261. 


UNCHRISTIAN    GNOSIS. 


239 


ward  world*  by  various  means,  and  unite 
together  by  many  points  of  communica- 
tion, so  the  following  considerations  will 
verify  such  an  observation  in  regard  to 
this  very  dijf'crcnce. 

At  the  time  of  the  first  propagation 
of  Christianity,  the  name  y»u.o-i:;.,  [g7iosis, 
knowledge,]  in  the  widely  extended 
phraseology  of  the  Jewish  divines  of 
Alexandria,  denoted  a  deeper  insight  into 
the  nature  and  the  inward  connection  of 
the  various  doctrines  of  religion.  As  far 
as  the  word  denotes  only  //us  general  idea. 
it  might  be  used  in  regard  to  Christianity, 
Mithout  prejudice  to  the  peculiar  nature 
of  Christian  i'ailh.  Nay,  even  here,  in 
conjunction  with  other  charismata  more 
immediately  connected  with  what  is  prac- 
tical^ there  might  be  a  charisma  of  Gnosis, 
which,  setting  out  from  its  own  peculiar 
position,  migfit  exert  a  general  and  bene- 
ficial effect  on  the  development  of  the 
Christian  life ;  and,  in  fact,  St.  Paul  men- 
tions such  a  thing  in  the  first  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians.  Thus  the  name  Gnosis, 
in  the  epistle  ascribed  to  Barnabas,  be- 
tokens that  deep  insight  into  the  spirit  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  the  object  of  the 
economy  of  the  Old  Testament,  which 
was  afforded  by  Christianity. 

Although  this  idea  was  applied  in  an 
arbitrary,  and  therefore,  in  a  false  manner, 
— as,  for  instance,  in  that  very  letter,  (see 
below) — yet,  considered  in  itself,  and  by 
itself,  it  contains  nothing  repugnant  to  the 
simple  nature  of  the  Gospel,  because  that 
Gospel,  in  its  very  simplicity,  is  destined 
to  imbue  and  appropriate  to  itself  all  the 
powers  and  dispositions  of  human  nature, 
even  those  that  are  spiritual,  and  in  its 
very  simplicity  it  opens  the  inexhaustible 
depths  of  Divine  wisdom  in  the  eye  of 
the  Spirit.  Among  the  mystical  sects  of 
the  Jeios  and  their  philosophical  teachers 
of  religion  at  Alexandria*  we  have 
already  remarked  the  germ  of  a  Gnosis, 
conceived  under  an  entirely  different  no- 
tion. Here, under  the  name  of  "the  Re- 
ligion of  the  Perfect^  an  esoteric  system 
of  doctrines,  containing  only  pure  ideas, 
which  could  be  comprehended  only  by  a 
small  number  of  initiated  persons,  con- 
sisting of  men  distinguished  for  their 
high  intellectual  gifts  of  perception,^  and 
their  high  spiritual  nature,  (the  ■TrtiviA.a.rt- 
Koi,) — was  opposed  to  the  faith  founded 


•  ["  Erscheinungswelt."   Lit.     World  of  Ap- 
pearances, or  phenomena. — Tn.] 

■f  See  the  Introduction,  pages  30,  31. 
^  [Anschauungsgabe.     See  Preface.] 


on  authority,  and  entertained  by  the  sense- 
bound  multitude,  who  held  fast  only  the 
symbolic  covering  of  these  pure  ideas, 
and  were  utterly  incapable  of  under- 
standing them  in  their  real  meaning. 
(These  were  the  ^J,t;x"«o^,  the  9roA^o^.) 
Such  an  opposition,  although  necessarily 
grounded  on  the  very  nature  of  the  reli- 
gion that  preceded  Christianity,  would 
entirely  overthrow  the  fundamental  cha- 
racteristics of  Christianity,  because  Chris- 
tianity pulled  down  every  such  partition 
wall  between  man  and  man,  and  Greek 
and  barbarian,  educated  and  uneducated, 
were  to  become  one  in  Christ,  and  one 
source  of  Divine  life  and  inward  illumi- 
nation was  to  be  present  in  one  common 
faith;  this  illumination  was  to  develope 
itself  in  proportion  to  their  advances  in 
holiness,  and  Christian  views  were  not  to 
be  made  dependent  on  intellectual  powers, 
bestowed  only  on  a  certain  class  of  men, 
but  were  to  proceed,  in  all,  out  of  their 
inward  Christian  life,  and  out  of  their 
own  inward  experience,  although,  never- 
theless, peculiar  depth  or  clearness  of  view 
might  be  a  particular  charisma.  Christ, 
indeed,  thanks  his  heavenly  Father  for 
having  revealed  to  children  what  he  had 
hidden  from  the  wise ;  and  St.  Paul  re- 
quires that  those  who  are  wise  in  this 
world  should  become  fools  that  they 
might  receive  Divine  wisdom.  But  then, 
such  Gnostics  as  these  were  unable  to 
comprehend  these  truths  and  to  become 
children,  in  order  to  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  and  to  he  poor  with  the 
rest  of  mankind,  and  to  be  rich  only  in 
Christ :  they  wished  to  have  precedence 
of  the  multitude  of  the  believers  by 
means  of  a  pretended  higher  kind  of 
wisdom. 

Another  disposition  belonging  to  this 
Gnosis,  which  is  at  variance  with  the  pe- 
culiar nature  of  the  gospel,  is  closely  con- 
nected with  that  of  which  we  have  just 
treated.  It  was  because  Christianity  pre- 
sented religion  in  its  independence  and 
elevation  above  every  thing  earthly,  that 
it  was  able  to  find  entrance  and  extend  it- 
self among  all  the  different  habits  of  life 
which  mankind  adopts,  and  form  a  Church 
differing  in  its  constitution  from  all  other 
social  unions  aniong  men,  and  indepen- 
dent of  them  ;  and  thus  also  it  presented 
religion,  considered  in  a  doctrinal  point  of 
view,  in  a  sulistantial  form,  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  all  speculations  as  well  as  of 
all  mythology,  and  in  a  form  adapted  to 
all  the  various  degrees  of  advancement 
which  are  found  in  human  nature,  and  all 


MIXTURE    OF    RELIGIONS    IN   THE    ROMAN    DOMINIONS. 


240 

the  various  periods  of  its  progress.  That 
Gnosis,  on  the  contrary,  brought  the  doc- 
trines of  religion  into  connection  again 
■with  all  the  inquiries  which  can  occupy 
a  speculative  reason,  as  was  the  case  in 
the  old  Oriental  systems  of  religion,  such 
as  those  of  Zoroaster,  of  Brahma,  and  the 
Buddhists.  A  speculative  cosmogony, 
desirous  of  explaining  what  is  incompre- 
hensible, and  a  theosophy,  which  would 
anticipate  the  views  reserved  for  a  higher 
state  of  being,  were  made  the  basis  of  the 
doctrines  of  religion,  and  these  would, 
therefore,  be  unintelligible  to  the  greater 
mass  of  mankind,  and,  m  consequence  of 
this,  an  opposition  would  necessarily  fol- 
low between  the  esoteric  and  the  exoteric 
religion.  This  mixture  of  religion  and 
speculation  would  besides  necessarily  be 
dangerous  to  the  essentially  practical 
character  of  Christianity,  in  virtue  of 
which  all  is  made  to  turn  on  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  sin,  the  application  of  the  re- 
demption provided  for  man,  and  the  sanc- 
tificalion  which  proceeds  out  of  it  by 
means  of  faith  working  by  love. 

It  appears,  then,  that  the  view  of  reli- 
gion on  which  this  Gnosis  was  founded, 
was  the  old  Oriental  system,  to  which 
also  the  Platonic  joined  itself,  as  well  as 
the  new  Platonic.  Jt  might  happen  that 
men  who  were  altogether  devoted  to  some 
such  Oriental  theosophy  would  constantly 
find  themselves  attracted  on  one  side  or 
the  other  by  Christianity,  which  is  calcu- 
lated to  lay  hold  on  human  nature  from 
so  many  different  sides,  while  yet  they 
might  be  unable  to  conquer  themselves 
so  far  as  to  sacrifice  their  former  habits  of 
thought  entirely  to  Christianity  ■,  and  hence 
they  endeavoured  to  form  for  themselves 
a  theosophistical  Christianity  of  tlieir 
own,  and  a  theosophic  Christ  of  their 
own,  after  their  own  manner.  And  thus 
also,  if  the  Gospel  were  now  to  make  its 
way  powerfully  among  the  Persians,  the 
Brahmins,  and  the  Hindoos,  it  is  most 
probable  that  similar  phenomena  would 
take  place  again  ;  the  real  and  genuine 
Christians  would  be  accompanied  by  con- 
verts who  would  endeavour  lo  amalga- 
mate Su|)hism,  Buddhism,  and  Brahmin- 
ism  with  Christianity  ;  and  in  fact  we  find 
traces  of  such  an  attempt  here  and  there 
even  now.* 


*  The  English  Missionary  reports  from  the  East 
Indies,  ami  the  conversations  of  that  genuine  evan- 
gelical missionary,  Martyn,  with  the  Persian 
Siiphi,  in  the  very  instructive  biography  of  that 
j>er6on,  will  give  proofs  of  this  assertion. 


In  order  to  perceive  clearly  the  forma- 
tion of  those  Gnostic  systems,  one  must  put 
oneself  into  that  remarkable  lime  of  fer- 
ment from  which  they  proceeded.  A 
lively  intercourse  and  an  unusual  inter- 
change of  ideas  was  then  taking  place  be- 
tween the  nations  of  the  western  and 
the  eastern  world,  which  are  otherwise  so 
widely  separated  by  their  situation  and 
by  their  dilferences  in  their  peculiarities 
of  character ;  an  intercourse  that  arose 
from  the  overgrown  empire  of  Rome, 
which  embraced  within  it  all  these  nations, 
or  at  least  brought  their  boundaries  into 
close  connection  with  each  other.  The 
spirit,  which  sighed  after  new  revelations 
from  heaven,  and  after  some  new  excite- 
ment of  the  spiritual  life,  unsatisfied  alike 
by  the  Hellenic  mythology  and  by  the 
dicta  of  philosophical  systems  among  the 
Greeks  (Hellenes,)  mingled  together  all 
these  various  elements  of  religion,  and  en- 
deavoured to  put  together  out  of  them  the 
fragments  of  a  system  of  truth  which  had 
been  lost.  The  comparison  of  different 
systems  of  religion  would  of  course  open 
many  resemblances  to  their  view,  which 
to  the  surprised  inquirer  would  seem  as 
evidences  of  truth  ;  for  the  religious  de- 
velopment of  human  nature  is  a  mirror 
which  reflects  partly,  the  original  revela- 
tion of  a  Divine  Being  who  draws  man  to 
him, — a  revelation  which  has  been  vari- 
ously propagatad  by  tradition,  either  more 
or  less  corrupted  :  partly,  the  needs,  de- 
sires, and  wishes  that  arise  from  the  reli- 
gious nature  of  man ;  and  partly  also, 
that  speculative  reason  which  mixes  itself 
up  in  all  religious  contemplations,  which 
has  its  own  fundamental  principles  that 
constantly  recur  under  different  forms, 
and  which  is  forever  wearying  itself  in 
vain  to  pass  over  that  line,  Avhich  the 
limits  of  human  knowledge  draw  around 
it.  At  Alexandria,  and  in  different  parts 
of  Asia,  even  Jewish  theologians  were 
unconsciously  carried  away  by  this  reli- 
gious eclecticism.* 

Accordingly,  in  the  Gnostic  systems  the 
elements  of  the  old  Oriental  systems  of 
religion,  (especially  the  Persian,  but  cer- 
tainly the  East  Indian  also,)  of  Jewish 
theology,  and  of  Platonic  philosophy,  may 
be  found  melted  down  together,  and  a 
more  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  dif- 
ferent religious  systems  of  the  interior  of 
Asia  might,  perhaps,  give  us  a  great  many 
new  disclosures  as  to  the  connection  be- 
tween these   systems ;    but  then  at   the 


See  the  Introduction,  p.  38. 


ANTICHRISTIAN  GNOSIS. 


241 


same  time  we  must  carefully  guard  our- 
selves agcinst  immediately  concluding 
that  an  outward  communication  has  at 
some  tune  or  other  taken  place  solely 
from  finding  an  agreement  which  may 
^ise  from  an  inward  source,  namely,  in 
the  selfsame  essential  dispositions  of  hu- 
man nature,  from  which  similar  pheno- 
mena will  result  under  similar  circum- 
stances. 

This  Gnosis  opposed  Judaism  as  a  re- 
ligion too  carnal,  too  earthly,  too  nar- 
row, and  too  little  theosophical ;  for  how 
little  spiritual,  how  cold,  how  little,  and 
emptv  must  Judaism  appear  to  men  of 
this  disposition,  when  they  compared  it 
with  the  old  colossal  systems  of  religion 
in  Asia,  although  to  one  who  knows  what 
purpose  religion  is  to  serve  for  man,  the 
very  comparison  v/hich  led  them  to  de- 
spise Judaism  would  be  the  first  thing 
which  would  lead  him  to  recognise  its 
full  value  for  the  religious  development 
of  human  nature.  Those  old  religions, 
in  their  enigmatic  form,  in  which  men  are 
inclined  to  look  for  lofty  wisdom  rather 
than  in  a  simple  one,  appeared  to  promise 
for  more  decisions  on  the  quesfio7is  which 
exercised  their  inquiries.  Mere  Platon- 
ism  appeared  to  them  too  jejune*  and  too 
measured  ;t  it  appeared  to  them  constantly 
to  confine  itself  entirely  to  the  narrow 
limits  of  finite  reason,  and  to  have  no 
sense  and  perception  of  higher  intercourse 
with  the  spiritual  world.  Gnosis  Avas 
desirous,  by  means  of  the  new  ideas 
opened  to  it  by  intercourse  with  the  East, 
of  obtaining  higher  and  more  recondite 
conclusions  about  the  nature  of  things, 
their  origin  and  development,  than  Pla- 
tonism  had  to  offer.  Had  this  Gnosis 
been  consistent  in  its  disposition,  and  had 
it  not  been  carried  away  by  the  mighty 
attracting  power  of  that  which  is  Divine 
in  Christianity,  it  might  have  come  in 
good  earnest  into  controversy  with  Chris- 
tianity as  a  religion  of  too  practical  and 
human  a  nature,  and  as  a  religion  that  did 
not  raise  itself  enough  into  the  superna- 
tural regions.  The  selfsame  character 
of  mind  which  in  the  Christian  Gnostjcs 
opposed  only  the  ecclesiastical  disposi- 


•  Zu  niichtem — Germ.  Perhaps  it  may  mean 
too  sober,  too  temperate. 

-j-  Zu  besonnt.n. — Germ.  Too  ratiocinative,  too 
much  the  result  of  deliberative  meditation. 

[I  add  the  German  words  here  that  those  of  my 
readers  who  understand  that  language  may  draw 
their  own  conclusions  as  to  what  Neander  intends 
here  ;  for  I  am  not  aware  of  any  expressions  in 
English,  which  are  entirely  synonymous  with  his. 
-H.J.R.] 

31 


j  tion,  and  a  faith  that  would  set  limits  to 
speciilation,  would  have  opposed  Chris- 
I  tianity  in  general,  had  it  been  carried 
j  to  extremes,  and  had  it  been  clearly 
:  aware  of  its  own  principles  ;  and,  indeed, 
'  the  traces  of  an  tmchristian,  and  also  of 
an  openly  antichristian  Gnosis  are  to  be 
found,  perhaps,  in  a  certain  class  of  the 
I  Ophites  (see  below),  in  the  Jewish  Cab- 
I  balists,  and  iu  the  Zabians,  or  the  disci- 
ples of  John. 

Although  the  Gnostic  systems  contain- 
!  ed  elements  selected  out  of  various  old 
!  systems   of  religion,  yet  they  can  never 
be  entirely  explained  from  the  supposi- 
tion of  an  intermixture  and  joining   to- 
'  gether  of  these  alone  ;  there  is  a  soul  and 
j  spirit  of  a  peculiar   kind*  which    ani- 
1  mates  most  of  these  collections.    In  the 
''  first  place,  the  time  in  which  they  origi- 
nated, has  impressed  up(5n  them  a  wholly 
peculiar  character,  just  as  it  often  hap- 
pens in  times  of  great  ferment,  that  cer- 
I  tain  dispositions  communicate  themselves 
I  to  a  whole  series  of  spiritual  phenomena, 
i  even  without  any  outward  connection  or 
;  intercourse.      Now  the  prevailing  tonet 
in  most  serious  minds  of  that  time,  was 
the  feeling  of  disunion,  and  of  being  un- 
satisfied b)^  the  existing  world  ;  a  longing 
which  would  overclimb  the  limits  of  the 
earth ;  a   desire  after  a  new  and  higher 
order  of  things.     This  tone  of  feeling  per- 
vades also  the  Gnostic  systems,  and  Chris- 
tianity worked  in  an  especial   manner  on 
this  tone ;   and  without  Christianity,  the 
Christian   Gnostic    systems   would   have 
become  an  utterly  and  entirely  different 
thing.     The  idea  of  redemption  was  that 
which    formed    the    peculiar   nature    of 
Christianity ;  and    this    idea   suited  that 
peculiar  tone  of  feeling  prevalent  among 
those  systems,  although   it  could  be  cm- 
!  braced  by  them  only  in  a  partial  manner, 
I  and  not  in  its  whole  extent,  and  all  the 
consequences    deducible   from   it.      The 
ideas  of  restoring  an  harmonious  tone  to 
a  world  in  which  it  had  been  broken,  of 
restoring  a  degraded  creation  to  its  original 
state,  of  restoring  the  lost  connection  be- 
tween heaven  and  earth,  of  the  revelation  of 
a  mighty  and  Divine  life  in  man,  elevated 
above  the  limits  of  human  nature,  as  well 
as    the  notion  of  a  new  course  of  de- 
velopment, which  had  entered  irito  the 
whole   economy   of  the   world  ; — these 


•  [Ein  eigenthiimliche.'i  beseelendes  Princip. — 
Germ.     Literally,  a  pcciiliar  animating  principle.] 

-j-  [Grundton,  key-note.  The  word  translated 
disunion  is  zwiespalt,  which  expresses  division,  in 
consequence  of  a  violent  rent.] 

X 


242 


FAITH    INDEPENDENT    OF    SPECULATION. 


were  the  ideas  which  communicated  a 
new  and  imposing  character  to  Gnosis  al- 
together. 

Those  theosophists  busied  themselves 
with  the  investigation  of  the  great  in- 
quiry, the  answer  to  which  has  always 
been  the  highest  problem  of  human  spe- 
culation ;  but  in  answering  which  human 
reason  must  always  recognise  its  own  in- 
sufficiency ;  or,  if  it  will  explain  that 
which  is  incomprehensible,  must  always 
deceive  itself  with  mere  phrases,  or  with 
the  fictions  of  fancy.  These  Gnostics, 
as  Oriental  theosophists,  in  whom,  at  least 
for  the  most  part,  the  Oriental  element 
predominated  over  the  Hellenic,  must  in 
no  manner  or  degree  whatever  be  com- 
pared with  the  thinking  people  of  the 
Western  world  ;  they  engaged  themselves 
far  more  in  representations  and  visible 
images,  than  in  abstract  ideas.*  Where 
the  thinking  man  of  the  west  would  have 
formed  to  himself  only  an  abstract  con- 
ception, with  them  a  living  appearance,  a 
living  personality  stood  before  their  souls, 
for  them  absolutely  to  look  upon  in  reali- 
ty. They  disregarded  the  abstract  notions 
of  the  mind  as  a  lifeless  sort  of  thing; 
every  thing  hypostasized  itself  in  their 
eyes,  where  nothing  but  abstract  ideas 
were  presented  to  the  thinkers  of  the 
Western  world.  The  image,  and  that 
which  was  represented  by  the  image, 
were  so  constantly  joined  together  in 
their  modes  of  thought,  that  they  were 
unable  to  separate  the  one  from  the  other. 
They  were  far  rather  carried  away  un- 
consciously by  the  ideas  that  floated  be- 
fore their  minds,  or  that  inspirited  them, 
from  one  mental  picture  to  another,!  from 
image  to  image,  so  that  they  were  not  in 
a  condition  to  develope  these  ideas  with 
any  thing  like  a  clear  consciousness  of 
their  nature.  The  inquiries  which  chiefly 
occupied  them  were  these :  IIow  is  the 
transition  from  infinite  to  finite  t  How 
can  man  imagine  to  himself  the  be- 
ginning of  a  cieation .?  How  can  he 
think  of  God  as    the  original    projector 


*  Sic  bewcgtcn  sich  viel  mchr  in  Anschauun- 
gen  und  Bifdcrn,  als  in  Begrlffcn. — Germ. 

[It  is  ilifiicult  to  render  these  words  exactly. 
Anschauung,  (hituitio)  looking  upon,  in  its  ori- 
ginal sense,  means  the  representation  or  image  of 
an  object  conveyed  to  the  mind  by  the  sight ;  and 
it  is  used  also  secondarily  of  the  notices  conveyed 
by  other  senses.  It  is  here  used  oijinixihle  repre- 
sentations or  images,  as  opposed  to  Begriffcn  or 
abstract  ideas.  For  some  further  remarks  on 
these  words, see  the  Preface. — H.J.  R.] 

I  [PVom  anschauung  to  anschauung. — See 
last  note.] 


of  a  material  world  so  foreign  to  his 
own  nature  ?  Whence  come  those  wide 
differences  of  nature  among  men,  from  the 
man  of  truly  godly  disposition,  down  to 
those  who  appear  given  up  entirely  to 
blind  desires,  in  whom  no  trace  of  the  ra- 
tional and  the  moral  creature  can  be 
found  .^* 

Now  it  was  exactly  here  that  Chris- 
tianity made  religious  faith  independent  of 
speculation,  and  cut  off"  at  once  all  that 
could  lead  to  those  speculative  cosmogo- 
nies, by  which  the  element  of  pure  reli- 
gious faith  was  only  troubled,  and  the 
confusion  between  the  ideas  of  God  and 
nature  furthered,  inasmuch  as  it  (Chris- 
tianity) directed  the  eye  of  the  spirit  be- 
yond the  whole  extent  of  the  visible 
world,  where,  in  the  chain  of  cause  and 
effect,  one  thing  is  constantly  unfolding 
itself  out  of  another,  to  an  Almighty  work 
of  creation  performed  by  God,  by  which 
the  worlds  were  produced,  and  in  virtue 
of  which  the  visible  did  not  spring  out  of 
that  which  appears.  Heb.xi.  3.  Creation 
is  received  here  as  an  incomprehensible 
fact,  under  the  constraint  of  a  faith,  that 
raises  itself  above  the  position  occupied 
by  the  understanding,  which  wishes  con- 
stantly to  deduce  one  thing  from  another, 
and  to  explain  every  thing,  while  it  de- 
nies all  that  is  immediate.f  This,  which 
is  the  only  real  point  of  practical  impor- 
tance, the  doctrine  of  the  Church  endea- 
voured to  maintain  in  its  conception  of  the 
creation  out  of  nothing;  opposing  itself 
thus  to  the  old  methods  ofj  representa- 
tion, which  limits  tli«  creation  of  God  by 
supposing  matter  already  in  existence,  and 
represents  him,  after  an  anthropopathical 
manner,  not  as  an  independent  original 
Creator,  but  as  a  being  who  acted  on 
and  formed  pre-existing  matter.  Gnosis 
would  not  acknowledge  any  such  limits  to 
speculation;  she  wished  to  explain  and 
represent  to  the  mind  hozo  God  is  the 
foundation  and  the  source  of  all  existence. 


*  On  this  portion  of  the  subject,  see  the  5th 
Book  of  Beausobre's  Histoire  du  Manichisme. 
Vol.  ii.  especially  p.  205,  &c.— H.  J.  R.] 

■^  [Alles  unmittelhare. — Germ.  I  understand  by 
this  all  immediate  acts  of  the  Divinity,  such  as 
creation.  The  word  translated  understanding,  is 
verstand,  and  we  must  Iiear  in  mind  the  distinc- 
tion usually  made  in  Germany  between  verstand 
and  vernunft,  the  understanding  and  the  reasmi. 
See  Coleridge's  Aids  to  Spiritual  Development. — 
H.  J.  R.] 

t  [Anschauungsweise. — Germ.  I  suppose  this 
word  to  mean  a  habit  of  considering  these  subjects, 
where  all  the  operations  of  the  Divinity  are  pre- 
sented to  the  view  of  the  mind  in  a  palpable  form 
or  image.     See  Preface. — H.  J.  R.] 


SYSTEM    OF   jENOS — ORIGIN    OF    EVIL. 


As  it  misunderstood  the  negative  import 
of  the  creation  out  of  nothing,  it  opposed 
to  it  the  old  principle, "  out  of  nothing- 
comes  nothing."  Instead  of  this  it  pre- 
sented to  its  imagination  the  idea  of  an 
outflowing  of  all  Being,  from  tlie  highest 
Being  of  the  Divinity.  This  idea  of  an 
emanation  would  allow  itself  to  be  con- 
ceived under  a  variety  of  images  :  under 
the  form,  for  instance,  of  a  numerical  de- 
velopment from  an  original  unity  ;  of  an 
outslreaming  of  light  from  an  original 
light;  of  an  unfolding  of  spiritual  powers 
or  ideas,  which  obtained  substantiality, 
and  of  an  utterance  of  a  series  of  syllables 
and  sounds,  till  they  were  re-echoed. 

The  idea  of  such  an  emanation  corres- 
ponds to  a  feeling  deeply  rooted  in  the 
human  mind,  and  found  in  it  something 
to  fasten  itself  upon  ;  but  at  the  same 
time,  it  gave  occasion  to  manj'^  specula- 
tions by  which  men  might  easily  be  led 
away  forever,  farther  from  that  which  is 
of  practical  importance  for  religious  belief, 
and  indeed,  might  lose  it  altogether. 

In  this  mode  of  representation  God  ap- 
peared as  the  incomprehensible  original 
source  of  all  perfection,*  and  shut  up 
within  himself;  and  no  means  of  transi- 
tion between  this  incomprehensible  Being 
of  God,  and  finite  existence  could  be  im- 
agined. Self -limitation^  a  letting  dovm^ 
is  the  first  beginning  of  a  communication 
of  life  on  the  part  of  God,  the  first  re- 
vealing of  the  hidden  God,  from  which 
every  other  revelation  of  God,  which  un- 
folds itself  further,  proceeds.!  Now  from 
forth  of  this  first  member  of  the  chain  of 
life  there  develope  themselves,  first,  the 
manifold  powers  or  attributes,  which 
dwell  in  the  very  Being  of  God,  which, 
up  to  that  first  time  of  his  letting  himself 
down  had  been  shut  up  in  the  abyss  of 
his  Being,  every  one  of  which  represents 
the  whole  Divine  existence,  in  some  one 
particular  point  of  view,  and  to  which,  in 
this  point  of  view,  the  names  that  belong 
to  the  Deity  were    transferred.*     These 

•  The  unfathomable  BoSse,  according  to  Valen- 
tinus,  the  Being  raised  above  all  description,  of 
whom  nothing  can  be  suitably  (cigentlich)  pre- 
dicated ;  the  (Sjc.tTor./u:t!rTcc  of  Biisilidas,  the  iy  of 
Philo. — See  pages  33,  34. 

\  A  Trectm  *«Tax»>J,/c  tixn-.v :  the  Trpocrov  K±rn- 
MTTTov  t:i/  Qi.u  hvpostaticaJly  embodied  (hypos- 
tasirt.  hypostasizcd)  in  av;yc  or  Acyic- 

t  Hence  conies  the  difference  in  the  use  of  the 
word  'xlotiv  among  the  Gnostics  ;  accor<l  ng  to  its 
etymological  meaning,  namely,  eternity,  it  some- 
times denotes  the  eternal,  a.s  a  distinctive  predicate 
ot"  the  Supreme  Being;  sometimes  it  denotes  those 
Divine    original    energies,  and    sometimes    the 


243 

Divine  powers,  therefore,  unfolding  them- 
selves into  substantiality,  are  the  seeds 
and  elements  of  all  other  developments  of 
life.  The  life  contained  in  them  developes 
and  individualizes  itself  constantly  more 
and  more,  and  in  such  a  manner  also,  that 
the  degrees  of  this  development  of  life 
constantly  go  lower  down,  and  the  spirits 
constantly  become  w'eaker,  the  more  dis- 
tant these  developments  are  from  the  first 
link  of  the  chain.  We  must  remark  that 
a  Gnosis  which,  in  its  endeavour  to  ex- 
plain the  incomprehensible,  was  forever 
falling  into  anthropopathism,  has  here  un- 
consciously attributed  the  relations  of 
time  to  the  Eternal. 

Granting  now  that  the  existence  of  a 
pure  spiritual  world,  akin  to  God,  was 
fairly  to  be  explained,  men  could  repre- 
sent to  themselves  the  development  of 
diflferent  degrees  of  perfection  ;  but  how 
was  it  possible  to  explain  the  origin  of 
the  material  world*  by  means  of  an  ema- 
nation' from  God  ?  and  how  the  origin  of 
evil  f  Even  in  respect  to  tlie  latter, — a  pro- 
blem on  which  speculation  has  made  ship- 
wreck so  often,  to  the  prejudice  of  God's 
holiness,  and  the  freedom  of  man,  a  being 
gifted  with  reason,  and  destined  for  mo- 
rality ;  even  in  regard  to  this  point.  Gnosis 
would  not  allow  any  limits  to  be  put  to 
speculation.  If  God  gave  freewill  to  man. 
and  if  this  freewill  is  the  cause  of  evil,  then 
the  origin  of  evil,  said  the  Gnostics,  falls 
back  on  God  himself.  They  would  not 
hear  of  a  difference  between  a  permission, 
and  an  actual  originating  cause,  on  the 
part  of  God.J  Now  whosoever  does  not 
follow  the  necessities  of  his  moral  nature, 
and  tlie  law  inscribed  upon  his  inmost 
conscience,  and  with  immovable  certainty 
of  faitii,  and  with  the  assurance  of  inward 
moral  experience,  firmly  hold,  that  evil 
can  be  founded  in  nothing  else,  and  be 
explained  from  nothing  else,  but  can  only 
be  comprehended  as  the  act  of  a  wilful- 
ness^ that  falls  away  from  God\s  hohj  law^ 
and  a  self-seeking  ichic/i  opposes  itself  to 
the  will  of  God^ — he  must  necessarily 
either  prejudice  the  holiness  of  God,  and 
take  away  the  objective  importance  of 
the  opposition  between  good  and  evil,  and 
therefore,  utterly  remove  in  its  foundations 


whole  world  of  emanations,  TrKMoijux,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  temporal  world,  ft  occurs  in  the 
latter  sense  in  Pleracleon  ap.  Origen.  7,  xiii.  in 
Joh.c.  11. 

f  [Sinnl'che,  that  which  is  the  object  of  the 
senses.     The  external,  or  material  world.] 

•  To  fjix  KcuKuov  xTiov  io-Ttv — wiis  thcir  usual 
motto  in  opposing  the  church  doctrine. 


244 


EMANATIONS ALEXANDRIAN    GNOSIS. 


the  idea  of  moral  good  and  evil,  consi- 
dered in  themselves,  because  he  throws 
back  the  origination  of  the  latter  upon 
God, — or  else  he  must  prejudice  the  om- 
nipotence of  God,  because  he  establishes 
an  absolute  evil,  and  an  independent  foun- 
dation of  that  evil  beyond  God,  by  which 
also,  in  fact,  he  fundamentally  removes 
the  idea  of  evil  in  a  moral  point  of  view, 
because  he  deduces  it  from  without,  and 
makes  of  it  an  independent  nature,  which 
operates  necessarily,  by  which  means  he 
involves  himself  at  the  same  time  in  a 
contradiction  with  himself,  through  the 
idea  of  an  independent  being  besides  God, 
of  a  God  who  is  not  God,  who  is  not  good. 
The  Gnostics,  avoiding  the  first  rock, 
made  shipwreck  on  the  second. 

They  united  a  Dualism  with  their  sys- 
tem of  emanations,  and  endeavoured  to 
explain  the  origin  of  tliis  whole  earthly 
world,  in  which  good  and  evil  are  mingled 
together,  and  which  does  not  answer  to 
the  ideal  of  the  spirit,  from  the  intermix- 
ture of  two  opposite  principles  and  their 
mutual  operations  ;  and  this  endeavour  to 
explain,  opened  a  wide  space  to  their 
speculation  and  their  formation  of  fantas- 
tic theories.  There  now  developed  them- 
selves here  two  modes  of  viewing  these 
matters,*  which,  however,  in  those  days, 
of  religious  and  philosophic  eclecticisms 
did  not  always  come  into  sharp  opposition, 
but  came  into  connection  with  each  other 
by  the  amalgamation  of  various  interme- 
diate members,  while  tlie  same  idea,  in 
fact,  forms  the  foundation  of  both  these 
modes  of  view,  only  that  it  was  conceived 
in  the  one  case  after  a  more  speculative 
fashion,  in  the  other  after  a  more  mythical. 
In  the  one  mode  of  conception  the  element 
of  Grecian  speculation  more  prevails,  in 
the  other  the  element  of  Oriental  imagery 
[anschauung,]  and  hence  these  two  modes 
of  vieAv  make  the  difference  between  an 
Alexandrian  Gnosis  and  a  Syrian  Gnosis, 
(the  latter  being  determined  particularly 
by  the  Influence  of  Parsisnij)  as  far  as  we 
can  oppose,  in  abstracts,  these  two  kinds 
of  Gnosis  to  each  other,  without  regard  to 
the  intermixture  of  them  together,  which 
we  find  in  the  phenomena  of  those  times. 

In  the  first  the  Platonic  notion  of  an  vXri 
prevails  ;  this  is  dead  and  lifeless  matter; 
the  boundary  of  which  from  without, 
limits  the  development  of  life,  that  pro- 
ceeds by  regular  gradations,  in  virtue  of 
which  imperfect  beings  develope  them- 
selves out  of  the  perfect,  each  more  im- 


perfect than  the  preceeding ;  and  this 
iiT^yj  again  is  represented  under  various 
forms — as  the  Darkness  that  stands  by  the 
side  of  the  Light — as  Emptiness  (xsca^/z-a, 
y.evov)  in  opposition  to  the  Fulness  of  the 
Life  of  God — as  the  Shade  that  stands 
beside  the  Light — and  as  Chaos  and  tlie 
dark  stagnant  water.  This  matter  of  it- 
self being  lifeless,  has  by  its  nature  no 
impulse ;  every  kind  of  life  is  foreign  to 
it,  and  of  itself  it  makes  no  attack  on  the 
Divine  being  ;  but  inasmuch  as  the  Divine 
developments  of  life,  (the  beings  that 
proceed  from  the  preceding  emanation,) 
the  farther  they  are  removed  from  their 
first  member,  become  always  weaker  and 
weaker,  because  their  connection  with 
that  first  member  is  always  less  close, 
there  arises  in  the  last  grade  of  tlie  deve- 
lopment an  imperfect  work,  which  cannot 
maintain  itself  in  connection  with  tlie 
divine  chain  of  life,  which  sinks  from  out 
of  the  world  of  ^ons  into  that  Chaos,  or 
else — which  is  the  same  representation 
a  little  diilerently  modified — something 
froths  over  out  of  the  fulness  of  the  Di- 
vine life  into  the  neighbouring  chaos.* 

Lifeless  matter  now  receives,  by  means 
of  its  intermixture  with  the  Living  Being, 
that  of  which  it  was  in  want,  a  quicken- 
ing ^l  but  then  the  Divine  Being,  the  Living 
Being,  is  also  injured  by  means  of  its  in- 
termixture with  the  chaotic.  Being  mul- 
tiplies itself;  a  subordinate,  deficient  life 
arises ;  ground  is  taken  for  a  new  world, 
and  a  creation  forms  itself  beyond  the 
bounds  of  the  emanation-world  ;  but,  as 
the  chaotic  principle  of  matter  on  the 
other  hand,  has  obtained  a  spirit  of  life,  a 
clear, active  opposition  to  the  Divine  nature 
now  comes  forward,  a  blind,  undivine 
natural  power,  of  an  entirely  negative 
character,  which  opposes  itself  hostilcly 
to  all  formation  through  the  Divine  Being  ;  t, 
and  thence  come  as  the  works  of  the 
spirit  of  the  trA»)  (the  wnK/.ia  vMy.ov) — Satan, 
evil  spirits,  and  wicked  men,  in  all  of 
whom  no  reasonable,  no  moral  principle, 
no  principle  of  freewill  prevails,  but  only 
blind  desires.  As  Dualism  carries  in  itself 
a  self-contradiction,  it  cannot  maintain  its 
ground  with  any  clear  speculative  thinker, 
who  is  conscious  of  the  course  of  his 
reasoning.  The  more  Gnosis  inclined 
to  this  side,  and  became  clearly  conscious 


[Anschauungsweise.] 


*  According  to  the  representations  (anschau- 
ungsweise)   of  the  Ophites,  and   of  Bardesanes. 

-j-  [Eine  Beseeking — Germ.  Literally  a  quick- 
ening, an  animation,  the  infusion  of  a  soul  of  life, 
H.  J.  R.1 


RELATION  BETWEEN  THE  ALEXANDRIAN  AND  SYRIAN  GNOSIS.        245 


to  itself  of  this  disposition,  which  to  say 
the  triitli  rarely  happened,  because  of  the 
prevalence  of  oriental  imagination  over 
occidental  abstract  comprehension,  in  all 
Gnostic  systems, — the  more  must  if  have 
endeavoured  to  lead  back,  this  Dualism  to  a 
higher  unity.  It  then  declared  expressly 
what  the  Cabbala  and  the  Neo-Platonism 
taught, — that  Matter  is  nothing  else  than 
the  necessary  limit*  bettveen  existence^ 
which  can  be  conceived  as  any  thing  hav- 
ing an  independent  existence,  only  by  the 
power  of  abstraction  :t  it  is  the  opposi- 
tion to  being,  which  arises  as  a  necessary 
limit  on  every  development  of  life  from  out 
of  the  Deity  .J  In  such  a  manner  Dualism 
might  finally  resolve  itself  into  Pantheism. 

The  other  mode  of  viewing  these 
matters  engrafted  itself  more  upon  the 
Parsic  doctrine  of  an  Ahriinan  and  his 
kingdom,  which  it  would  be  an  obvious 
course  for  the  Gnostic  sects,  especially 
those  which  were  formed  in  Syria,  to  ap- 
propriate to  themselves.  This  mode  of 
view  supposed  an  active,  wildly-raging 
dominion  of  evil  or  darkness,  which 
by  means  of  its  attack  on  the  empire  of 
light,  introduced  a  mixture  of  light  and 
darkness,  of  the  divine  and  that  which 
opposes  it.  Different  as  these  two  modes 
of  conception  may  appear  in  their  way  of 
representation,  yet  the  selfsame  funda- 
mental idea  may  be  recognised  in  them. 

When  the  latter  mode  of  view  takes 
a  somewhat  more  speculative  turn,  it 
passes  into  the  first,  of  which  we  shall  find 
traces  in  the  views  of  Manicheeism,  which 
bears  upon  it  far  more  than  all  Gnostic  sys- 
tems the  mark  of  Parsism  (see  below;)  and 
where  the  first  mode  of  view  takes  a  more 
poetical  character,  and  endeavours  to  pic- 
ture itself  upon  the  imagination,  it  passes  : 
over  involuntarily  into  the  last.§ 

•  It  was  thus  also  called  the  exterior  rind  of  | 
existence,  Hflvp- 

■f  By  means  of  a  ycfloc  hoyo;  according  to  the 
Neo-Platonists. 

t  Thus  the  Gnostics  in  Irenaeus,  (ii.  4,)  ex- 
pressly defend  themselves  against  the  reproach  of 
DuaUsm.  '  Contincre  omnia  Patrem  omnium  ct 
extra  Pieroma  esse  nihil  et  id  quod  extra  et  quod 
intus,  dicere  eos  secundum  agnitionem  et  ignoran- 
tiam,  sed  non  secundum  localem  distiintiam."  The 
lower  creation  was  contained  in  the  Pieroma  veluti 
in  tunica  maculam.  * 

§  Thus,  for  example,  where  Plotinus  paints 
matter  as  seized  with  a  longing  after  light  or  the 
soul,  and  speaks  of  it  as  darkening  the  light,  while 
it  endeavours  to  embrace  it,  Plotin.  Enneas  I. 
lib.  viii.,  c.  14.     'rA*i  Traif.urx  7rg',<ra<T«,  text  iUv  m- 

TO  IKubty  <fft)C  iff-JtOTOOfl't  T>l  /M^ti- 


Even  among  the  Platonists  there  were 
some,  who  supposed  that  from  the  very 
beginning,  together  with  an  unorganic, 
dead  matter,  as  the  materials  for  the  bodily 
20orld^  there  existed  also  a  blind,  un- 
bridled, moving  power,  an  undivine  soul, 
as  the  originally-moving  and  active  prin- 
ciple. Thus,  while  that  unorganic  matter 
was  organized  into  the  bodily  world  by 
the  formative  power  of  the  Deity,  that 
formative  power  communicated  also  law 
and  reason  to  that  wild,  tumultuous,- and 
reason-opposing  soul.  Thus  the  chaos 
of  the  vK-n  was  formed  into  an  organized 
body  of  the  world,  and  that  blind  power 
into  a  reasonable  principle  of  the  soul  of 
the  world,  that  animates  the  universe. 
Thus,  while  all  reasonable  spiritual  life 
in  human  nature  descends  from  this  last, 
all  that  is  contrary  to  reason  comes  from 
the  other :  all  that  is  impelled  by  desire 
and  passion ;  all  evil  spirits  are  its  pro- 
ductions. One  sees  easily  how  the  idea 
of  this  -^fv^fi  u.\uyo<;,  floating  over  the 
chaos,  might  fall  in  with  the  idea  of  a 
Satan,  who  originally  presided  over  the 
kingdom  of  darkness.* 

\\\  the  system  of  the  Zabians  or  dis- 
ciples of  John,  Avhich  is  undoubtedly 
connected  in  its  origin  with  the  Syrian 
Gnosis,  although  there  appears  an  inde- 
pendent kingdom  of  darkness  with  its 
own  peculiar  powers,  yet  this  has  no  in- 
fluence on  the  higher  kingdom  of  light-t 
It  was  the  thought  of  one  of  the  genii  of 
the  kingdom  of  light,  to  tear  himself  loose 
from  the  source  which  every  thing  ought 
to  glorify,  and  to  form  an  independent 
world    that  should  exist   for  itself it 


*  See  Plutarch  de  AnimaeProcreat.  e  Timseo. 
especially  c.  9.    Opera  Ed.  Hutlen.  t.  xiii.  p.  29G. 

f  This  sect  of  Zabians,  (^x.^Tiariu,  from  VHV') 
Nazarenes,  Mandaeans,  (according  to  iSorherg, 
from  y"1*5  fx^fiiiraj  or  yvuivTMu,)  clearly  derives  its 

origin  from  those  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist, 
who,  contrary  to  his  spirit  and  feeling,  after  his 
martyrdom  took  up  an  hostile  disposition  towards 
Christianity.  Traces  of  such  persons  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Clementine,  and  the  Kccognitiones 
Clementis,  and  perhaps,  also  in  the  in/Aip'.&j.rTiTTui 
■yuhiK'jKJt  of  Hegesippus.  See  F.  Walcli.  de 
Sabseis  comment.  Soc.  Keg.  Gott.  t.  iv..  Part.  Phi- 
lolog.  From  these  a  sect  afterwards  formal  itself, 
whose  system  being  formed  out  of  the  elements 
of  older  Oriental  theosophy,  is  of  great  impor- 
tance for  the  history  of  Gnosticism.  A  critical 
treatise  on  their  most  important  religious  book, 
the  Liber  Adami,  would  contribute  much  to  this 
object.  See  the  critique  of  that  work  by  Gesc- 
nius,  in  the  Literatur  Zeitung  of  Jena.  Jena. 
1817,  No.  48—51,  and  (Klcukcr'sl)  critique  on 
it  in  the  Anzeigen  of  Gottiniren. 
X  2 


246        INTERMIXTURE    OF   THE    ALEXANDRIAN    AND    SYRIAN   GNOSIS. 


was  this  thought  that  first  became  the 
cause  of  a  mixture  between  the  two  king- 
doms, the  first  foundation  of  this  visible 
world,  built  upon  an  earth  won  from  the 
kingdom  of  darkness;  i.  e.  from  chaos, 
which  world  the  powers  of  darkness  at 
once  endeavour  to  seize  upon  or  to  de- 
stroy, because  they  will  not  suffer  any 
strange  rule  in  their  domain.  Now,  while 
this  genius,  Matur^  who  formed  the  third 
stage  in  the  development  of  life,  was 
looking  into  the  dark  water  of  chaos, 
there  arose  out  of  his  reflection  in  it  an 
imperfect  genius,  formed  from  a  mixture 
of  this  form  of  light  with  the  being  of 
darkness,  and  to  be  ennobled  by  degrees 
hereafter,  namely,  Fctahil^  the  former  of 
the  world,  from  whose  imperfection  all 
the  defects  of  this  world  are  derived.*  In 
the  system  of  the  Syrian  Bardesanes  also, 
matter  appears  as  the  mother  of  Satan.f 

This  sufliciently  shows  how  the  modes 
of  view  of  the  Syrian  and  the  Alexan- 
drian Gnosis  pass  into  each  other  on  this 
side.  It  may,  indeed,  very  fairly  be  asked, 
whether  one  is  justified  in  speaking  of 
a  Gnosis  as  originally  Alexandrian,  or 
whether  Syria  be  not  the  birthplace  of 
all  Gnosis,  whence  it  was  only  trans- 
planted to  Alexandria,  and  received  a  pe- 
culiar stamp  at  this  latter -place  in  conse- 
quence of  the  Platonizing,  Hellenizing 
disposition,  which  prevailed  there  .'  In 
Alexandria,  such  a  Gnosis  would  pro- 
bably find  much  to  engraft  itself  upon  in 
certain  Jewish  idealistic  philosophy  of 
religion,  already  in  existence  there ;  but 
in  this  the  platonic  and  occidental  element, 
which  keeps  itself  more  on  the  pure  ideal- 
istic point  of  view,  and  does  not  imme- 
diately hypostasize  ideas,  and  make  repre- 
sentations of  them,  was  two  predominant 
to  sufler  the  peculiar  character  of  Gnosis 
to  proceed  forth  from  it,  without  the  in- 
fluence of  the  pure  Orientalism  from  Syria. 

One  might  imagine  that  this  double 
mode  of  view  would  have  produced  a 
peculiar  distinction  in  the  practical  spirit 
of  these  two  systems.  As  the  Syrian 
mode  of  view  supposed  an  active  empire 
of  evil,  which  was  destroyed  with  the 
empire  of  matter,  one  might  be  led  to 
imagine  that  it  made  the  avoidance  of  this 
abominable  matter  and  its  hostile  produc- 


•  Lichtnatur,  Being  of  light. — Germ. 

I  This  idea  is  entirely  to  be  compared  with  the 
ophiomorphos  of  the  ophitish  system,  (see  below,) 
although  in  the  ophitish  system  this  appears 
of  a  lower  kind ;  and  the  ophitish  system,  in 
its  speculative  notions,  is  yet  akin  to  the  Alexan- 
drian system  of  ValenUnus  in  many  respects. 


tions,  and  the  strictest  asceticism,  the  chief 
object  of  morality.  As,  on  the  contrary, 
the  Alexandrian  Gnosis  considered  matter 
as  unorganized  materials  for  formation,  and 
the  Divine  Being  as  i\\e  formative  prin- 
ciple^ one  would  think  that  it  would  re- 
recognise  no  such  negative  system  of 
morality,  but  would  establish  a  more 
active  formation  and  improvement  of  the 
world,  by  the  power  of  the  Divine  prin- 
ciple as  the  foundation  of  the  moral  sys- 
tem. This  supposition  might,  perhaps,  ap- 
pear still  more  probable  on  a  comparison 
of  many  Alexandrian  and  Syrian  systems. 

And  yet  on  a  more  accurate  investiga- 
tion, it  appears  that  such  a  difference  in 
the  practical  influence  of  these  two  sys- 
tems is  by  no  means  necessary.  Even  a 
system,  in  which  the  Parsic  Dualism  pre- 
vailed to  the  utmost  extent,  might  recog- 
nise in  the  whole  universe  a  higher  life, 
which  was  only  bound  prisoner  in  the 
bonds  of  matter,  and  might  recommend 
co-operation  towards  the  freeing  of  that 
life,  by  victory  over  the  empire  of  dark- 
ness, by  means  of  a  practical  forming  and 
improving  hifluence  over  nature.  And  so, 
in  fact,  Parsism  commanded  an  outward 
activity,  because  it  represented  all  forma- 
tive influence  upon  the  outward  world, 
especially  agriculture,  as  a  struggle  against 
the  destroying  and  order-opposing  power 
of  Ahriman,  and  as  an  activity  which 
was  employed  in  the  service  of  Ormuzd. 
And  therefore,  the  dualistic  Manicheeism 
furthered  a  great  reverence  towards  na- 
ture, and  by  no  means  an  enthusiastic 
and  ascetic  contempt  of  it;  although  on 
another  ground  this  system  led  to  a  strict 
asceticism :  and  certainly  it  cannot  be 
denied,  that  the  prevailing  feeling  of 
Oriental  notions,  as  we  may  even  now 
see  from  the  people  of  the  East,  in  general 
shone  forth  in  highly  prizing  an  ascetic 
and  contemplative  disposition,  which  ele- 
vated itself  above  the  ordinary  earthly  life. 
But  this  disposition  had  also  spread  itself 
already  in  the  district,  where  a  Grecian 
spirit  prevailed,  and  had  found  reception 
particularly  in  Alexandria.*  The  pure 
Platonic  doctrine  of  gross  matter,  as 
being  the  source  of  blind  desires,  and  of 
the  guilt  contracted  by  the  soul  in  a  former 
life,  might  become  a  point  for  a  strict  as- 
ceticism to  fix  itself  upon ;  as  in  fact  it 
did  to  many  Platonists. 

The  most  essential  difference  between 
the  difl^erent  Gnostic  systems,  the  influ- 
ence of  which  was  very  great  on  the  reli- 


See  the  introduction. 


THE  DEMIURGOS. 


24*; 


gious  and  spiritual  character  of  these 
sects,  concerns  their  diflbrent  view  of  the 
relation  of  the  temporal,  earthly  system 
of  the  world,  to  that  higher  and  invisible 
one,  of  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  the 
M'hole  development  of  human  nature, 
(whether  they  supposed  a* gradual  deve- 
lopment of  the  theocracy,  as  an  organi- 
cally-connected whole ;  or  whether  they 
made  Christianity  out  to  be  a  fragment 
wliicli  appeared  all  on  a  sudden,  without 
previous  preparation,)  and  of  the  relation 
of  Christianity  to  Judaism.  All  these 
considerations  are  closely  connected  to- 
gether. 

All  Gnostics  agree  in  this,  that  they 
suppose,  as  we  have  above  remarked,  a 
world  in  which  there  is  a  pure  develop- 
ment of  life  out  of  God ;  a  creation, 
wliicli  is  nothing  but  a  pure  unfolding  of 
the  Divine  Being,*  as  being  elevated  far 
above  that  creation  which  was  produced 
from  without  by  means  of  the  formative 
power  of  God,  and  was  limited  by  matter 
previously  existing  ; — and  they  agreed  in 
this  also,  that  they  did  not  allow  the 
Father  of  that  higher  emanation-world  to 
be  the  immediate  Former  of  this  lower 
creation  ;  but  they  brought  down  the 
Former  of  the  world,  (the  Srifji.iov^yo<;,)  far 
below  that  higher  system  and  its  Father, 
because  he  (the  ^-yifitotrgyo?)  was  con- 
nected with  the  universe,  which  was 
formed  and  governed  by  him.  But  the 
ditierence  among  them  was  this  ;  namely, 
that  though  they  agreed  as  to  the  ex- 
istence of  this  inferiority,  they  were  at 
variance  as  to  the  mode  of  it.  One  party, 
setting  out  from  views  which  had  already 
long  been  prevalent  among  the  Alex- 
antlrian  Jews,  supposed  that  the  Supreme 
God  had  produced,  and  still  governed  this 
world,  by  means  of  the  angels,  who  were 
his  ministering  spirits.  At  the  head  of 
these  angels  stood  one,  who  guided  and 
ruled  every  thing,  and  on  that  account 
was  especially  called  the  Former  and  the 
Governor  of  the  world.  They  compared 
tliis  Demiurgos  with  the  spirit  that  formed 
and  animated  the  world,  after  the  system 
of  Plato  and  the  Platonists,  which  also 
(according  to  the  Timajus  of  Plato,  en- 
deavoured to  form  the  image  of  the 
Divine  reason  in  that  which  belonged  to 
time,  in  that  which  was  "  Becoming  to 
be. "I     This  angel  is  a  representative  of 


the  Supreme  God  on  this  lower  stage  of 
existence  ;  he  does  not  act  independently, 
but  only  according  to  the  ideas  given  to 
him  by  the  Supreme  God,  as  the  world- 
forming  soul  of  the  Platonists  creates 
every  thing  after  the  ideas  imparted  to 
him  by  the  supreme  »ov?  :*  but  these  ideas 
are  elevated  above  his  own  limited  being; 
he  is  unable  to  understand  them ;  he  is 
only  their  unconscious  instrument,  and  is, 
therefore,  unable  himself  to  understand 
the  meaning  of  the  whole  work  wrought 
by  him  :  as  an  instrument  guided  by  a 
higher  inspiration,  he  reveals  what  is 
above  his  own  comprehension.  Here, 
therefore,  they  grafted  themselves  on  the 
current  ideas  of  the  Jews,  in  supposing 
that  the  Supreme  God  had  revealed  him- 
self to  their  ancestors  through  the  medium 
of  an  angel  that  served  him  as  the  organ 
of  his  will ;  and  that  the  Mosaic  legis- 
lation was  derived  from  such  an  angel. 
And  they  considered  the  Demiurgos  as 
the  representative  of  the  Supreme  God 
in  this  respect  also;  just  as  the  rest  of 
the  nations  of  the  world  were  partitioned 
among  the  other  angels,  as  tlieir  guides, 
so  the  Jewish  people,  as  the  peculiar  peo- 
ple of  Jehovah,  that  is,  the  Supreme  God, 
were  committed  to  the  care  of  the  Demi- 
urgos, as  his  representative.f  He  also 
revealed  here  in  the  establishment  of 
their  religion,  as  well  as  in  the  creation 
of  the  Avorld,  those  higher  ideas  which 
he  himself  could  not  understand  in  their 


f  [As  Neander  has  only  referred  generally  to 
the  Timseus,  I  have  taken  this  phrase  from  the 
translation    by   Taylor.     I   add  the   original   of 


Neander :  Das  ideal  der  gottlichen  vernunft  in 
dem  tvcrdenden,  zeitlichen  darzustellen  strebt. 
We  have  no  word  that  answers  to  wtrdetidcn, 
which  expresses  the  bei^inniiig  of  existence,  the 
becoming,  not  the  actually  being. — H.  J.  R.] 

[Since  the  above  note  was  written  a  friend  lent 
me  "  Bockshammer  on  the  Freedom  of  the  Will ; 
translated  by  A.  Kaufman,  of  Andover,  1835:" 
in  which  the  word  '  becoming'  is  used  substan- 
tively, e.  g.  p.  75 :  "  Yet  this  connecting  love, 
according  to  the  representation  of  the  above 
named  treatise,  is  rather  an  originated  becoining, 
man,  an  original  being :"  and  a  note  referring  to 
Neander  is  added  by  the  translator,  to  this  effect : 
"  The  idea  of  a  secondary  Being,  without  begin- 
ning, anfangslosen  werdens,  an  originated  becom- 
ing in  opposition  to  an  unorigiaated  Being,  (eter- 
nal generation,)  was  somewhat  refined,  was 
.somewhat  incomprehensible ;  nay,  it  appeared 
even  contradictory  to  Arius,  who  had  but  little  of 
the  speculative  or  intuitive,  «Scc.  Neander,"  &c. — 
H.  J.  K.] 

*  I'he  0  {3-T/  (faisv  (in  opposition  to  the  ywimv, 
or  the  6s'/f  yohTi;  of  Plato,)  the  Trxf»i«jyix%  of  the 
Divine  reason  hypostasized. 

\  According  to  the  Alexandrian  version  of 
Deuteron.  xxxii.  8.  9,  sti  Jiifju^i^tv  o  i/4<»'T'C  eSv*, 


248  THE    DEMIURGOS. 

true  meaning.  The  old  Testament,  like 
the  whole  creation,  was  the  veiled  symbol 
of  a  higher  system. 

But  in  the  Jewish  people  itself  they 
made  a  complete  distinction,  after  the 
Alexandrian  fashion,  between  the  great 
multitude,  which  is  only  a  representative 
type  of  the  people  of  God  (the  Israelites 
according  to  the  flesh,  the  'lo-^arjX  «tV9»)Tof, 
xa,Tct  0-a^xa,)  and  the  small  number  of 
those  wlio  l3ecome  really  conscious  to 
themselves  of  the  destination  of  the  people 
of  God.  (The  souls  of  this  number  are 
the  spiritual  men  of  Philo,  the  'la-^unX 
weviJi.cx,rtKO(;,  to-nto;,  the  generation  conse- 
crated to  God  which  really  lived  in  the 
contemplation  of  God,  the  uvm^  o^uv  toi' 
©ioc,  the  'TniivfA.otTtxoi^  yvuffTtKot,  in  oppo- 
sition to  tlie  -^v^tKoi  or  m-iariKoi.)  The 
latter  (the  4'^X^'^^')  '^''^  their  fleshly 
thoughts  kept  fast  to  that  which  was  out- 
Avard  only  ;  they  did  not  observe  that  this 
was  merely  a  symbol,  and  therefore,  they 
did  not  recognise  the  intention  of  that 
symbol.*  Those  sensuous-minded  men 
did  not  recognise  the  angel  through  whom 
God  revealed  himself  in  all  the  appear- 
ances of  God  (the  Theophanies)  in  the 
Old  Testament,  that  is  to  say,  the  Demi- 
iirgos,  in  his  just  relation  to  the  hidden 
Supreme  God,  who  never  reveals  himself 
in  the  world  of  sense ;  they  confused 
form  and  prototype,  symbol  and  idea.| 
They  did  not  elevate  themselves  above 
the  Demiurgos,  but  considered  him  as  the 
Supreme  God  himself.  Those  spiritual 
men,  on  the  contrary,  have  clearly  recog- 
nised the  ideas  which  were  wrapped  up  in 
Judaism,  or  at  least  have  a  presentiment 
of  them  ;  they  havg  raised  themselves  up 
beyond  the  Demiurgos  to  recognise  the 
Supreme  God,  and  thence  they  become 
peculiarly  his  true  worshippers  {di^a-n-iv- 
rai.)  Tlie  religion  of  the  former  class 
was  solely  founded  on  a  faith  which  they 
took  upon  autliority,  while  these  latter 
lived  in  the  contemplation  of  Divine 
things.     The  former  required  to  be  edu- 


*  Thus  a  moderate  Gnostic,  who  had  not 
rcaclioJ  that  refined  Gnosticism  formed  by  the 
mixture  of  Alexandrian  idealism  with  Syrian  the- 
osophy,  determines  (in  the  letter  ascribed  to  Bar- 
nabas,) that  the  .lews  had  entirely  misunderstood 
the  whole  ceremonial  law,  by  ol)scrvinK  it  out- 
wardly, instead  of  seeing  in  it  only  an  allegorical 
representation  of  general  religious  and  moral  truths. 
It  was  Gnosis,  which  first  opened  this  true  sense 
of  it. 

j  [The  form,  and  the  original  form  represented 
by  it;  the  symbol,  and  the  idea  symbolized.  The 
German  is,  i^ie  verwechselteii  auch  hier  bild  und 
urbild,  symbol  und  idee.] 


cated  by  the  Demiurgos  by  rewards  and 
punishments,  and  the  means  of  terror; 
but  these  latter  required  no  such  means 
of  discipline;  they  raised  themselves  up 
by  the  force  of  their  spirit  to  the  Supreme 
God,  who  is  a  source  of  blessing  only  to 
those  M'ho  ace  capable  of  communion 
with  him,  and  they  love  him  for  his  own 
sake.* 

Now,  when  these  Jewish  theosopliists 
of  Alexandria  had  embraced  Christianity, 
and  interwoven  their  former  notions  with 
it,  they  saw  the  spirit  of  the  Old  Testament 
entirely  unveiled  in  Christianity,  and  the 
highest  ideas  of  the  whole  creation  brought 
clearly  before  the  light;  and  now  for  the 
first  time  the  object  of  the  whole  creation, 
and  of  the  whole  development  of  human 
nature  became  clear.  As  far  as  the  highest 
^on,!  who  appeared  in  the  person  of 
Christ,  was  elevated  above  the  angels  and 
the  Demiurgos,  so  far  is  Christianity  ele- 
vated above  Judaism  and  the  whole  earthly 
creation.  The  Demiurgos  himself  now 
recognises  a  revelation  which  entered  into 
his  kingdom,  and  from  henceforth  serves 
it  as  its  instrument,  conscious  that  he  was 
only  an  instrument.^ 

The  other  party  of  the  Gnostics  con- 
sisted especially  of  persons  who  had  not 
been  attached  to  the  Mosaic  religion  before 
their  conversion  to  Christianity,  but  had 
formed  to  themselves  in  former  times  an 
Oriental  Gnosis  opposed  to  Judaism  as 
well  as  to  all  national  religions,  a  kind  of 
system  of  which  we  find  some  traces  in 
the  books  of  the  Zabians,  and  which  is 
constantly  found  in  the  East  among  the 
Persians  and  the  Hindoos.  They  did  not, 
like  the  former,  consider  the  Demiurgos 
and  his  angels  merely  as  subordinate  and 
limited  beings,  but  as  beings  entirely 
hostile  to  the  Supreme  God.  The  Demi- 
urgos and  his  angels  wished  to  establish 
themselves  in  their  limited  condition  as 
independent  beings  and  would  suffer  no 
foreign  sovereignty  in  their  dominion. 
Whatever  of  a  higher  nature  comes  down 
into  their  sphere  they  endeavour  to  keep 


*  See  page  33,  et  seqq.  on  the  twofold  views 
mentioned  by  Philo. 

■j"  Net/;  or  xoj/oc. 

\  We  see  easily  how  these  Gnostics  might  use 
the  passages  of  the  New  Testament  where  the 
X'-j-cf  x^xjiSac  it*-  Tcu  rUu  is  compared  with  the 
Acycc  xa^»6ac  St  iyyiKm,  (see  e.  g.  Heb.  ii.  and 
Ephes.  iii.  10,)  in  order  to  form  their  artificial  su- 
perstructure of  doctrines,  by  means  of  tlieir  fanci- 
ful and  idle  speculation,  on  the  foundation  of  a 
Jew,  hints  only  thrown  out,  en  passant,  by  the 
apostle. 


DIFFERENCE    BETWEEN   THE    GNOSTIC    SYSTEMS. 


249 


imprisoned  there,  that  it  may  never  be 
able  to  raise  itself  above  their  narrow 
limits.  In  this  system  it  is  probable  that 
the  empire  of  the  world-forming  angels  1 
coincided  for  the  most  part  with  that  of  \ 
the  deceiving  spirits  of  the  stars,  which  i 
are  hostile  to  man's  freedom  and  exercise  i 
a  tyrannic  sway  over  the  afi'airs  of  this  ; 
world.*  The  bemiurgos  (according  to  ' 
this  system,)  is  a  limited  and  limiting  j 
being,  proud,  envious,  and  revengeful,  and  i 
this  his  character  declares  itself  in  the  i 
Old  Testament  which  is  derived  from  him. 
As  tliese  Gnostics  were  unable,  from 
want  of  the  requisite  exegetic  and  herme- 
neutic  knowledge,  as  well  as  of  the  pro-  j 
per  pffidagogo-historicalt  point  of  view,  to 
understand  the  Old  Testament,  which  ; 
was  so  opposite  to  their  system,  and  were  | 
yet,  nevertheless,  accustomed  to  give  their 
judgment  upon  every  thing,  they  attributed  : 
all  die  errors  which  arose  from  a  gross  j 
and  sensuous  anthropopathical  view  of 
the  Old  Testament  among  the  common  j 
sort  of  Jews,  to  the  Old  Teslameni  itself. 
But,  according  to  their  view,  the  error  of 
the  Jews  consisted  solely  in  this,  that* 
they  considered  the  Demiurgos  who  re- 
veals himself  such  as  he  is,  in  the  Old 
Testament,  to  be  the  Supreme  God,  who 
differs  from  him  infinitely.  The  Demi- 
urgos is  (according  to  them,)  really  such 
a  being  as  that  which  the  Jews  represented 
to  tliemselves  under  the  notion  of  the  Su- 
preme God.  These  Gnostics  believed 
that  they  recognised  the  form  of  that 
hateful  Demiurgos  in  the  Old  Testament, 
and  also  in  nature,  which  they  judged 
with  the  same  dogmatical  human  rashness. 
The  Supreme  God,  the  God  of  holiness 
and  love,  who  stands  in  no  connection 
with  the  world  of  sense,  has  not  revealed 
himself  in  this  earthly  creation  by  any 
thing,  except  by  some  Divine  seeds  of 
life  which  are  scattered  abroad  in  human 
nature,  and  whose  unfolding  the  Demi- 
urgos endeavours   to  stop  and  to  over- 

*  Thus  the  seven  star  spirits,  and  the  twelve 
star  spirits  of  the  zodiac,  which  were  produced  liy 
the  evil  connection  between  the  deceived  Fetahil 
with  the  spirit  of  darkness,  in  the  Zaliian  system, 
play  an  important  part  in  all  that  is  evil.  It  is 
from  their  deceitful  artifices  that  Judaism  and 
Christianity,  which  are  so  hateful  to  the  Zabians, 
are  produced. 

I  [I  suppose  Neander  here  considers  the  Jew- 
ish history  a-s  afTording  an  instructive  lesson  to 
man,  as  containing  the  Divine  mode  of  education 
for  human  nature;  but  as  I  am  not  certain  that 
this  is  his  view,  I  have  only  put  the  German  com- 
pound word  into  literal  English;  {iridagogisch- 
geschicbtliche  gesichtspuncht. — H.  J.  K.] 
23 


whelm.  He  can  be  acknowledged  and 
honoured  in  the  highest  degree  only  in 
the  mysteries,  by  the  few  who  are  spiritual 
men  ;  and  now  (according  to  thein,)  this 
God  has  let  himself  down  all  at  once, 
without  previous  preparation,  to  this 
system  of  the  world  by  means  of  his 
highest  JEon^  in  order  to  draw  up  to  him- 
self the  higher  spiritual  natures  akin  to 
himself  which  are  imprisoned  Uiere. — 
Christianity  can  lind  no  point  in  all  crea- 
tion to  attach  itself  upon,  except  in  some 
mysteries  and  philosophical  schools,  in 
which  a  higher  kind  of  wisdom  is  propa- 
gated as  their  common  doctrine. 

This  difference  between  the  Gnostic 
systems  was  of  the  greatest  importance  in 
a  theoretical  and  practical  point  of  view. 
As  the  Gnostics  of  the  first  class  recog- 
nised in  the  Demiurgos  the  instrument  of 
the  Supreme  God  and  his  representative, 
who  formed  nature  according  to  the  ideas 
of  the  Supreme  God,  and  conducted  the 
development  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  in 
history,  they  might,  in  accordance  w^ith 
their  principles,  search  for  the  revelation 
of  the  Divinity  in  nature  and  in  history; 
they  needed  not  of  necessity  to  be  en- 
tangled in  an  unchristian  hatred  of  the 
2corld.  They  might  acknowledge  Uiat 
the  Divinity  might  be  revealed  under 
earthly  relations,  and  that  every  thing 
earthly  might  by  this  means  become  en- 
nobled. They  might,  therefore,  be  very 
moderate  in  an  ascetic  point  of  view,  as 
in  fact  we  find  was  the  case  with  many 
of  this  class,  although  the  practically  in- 
jurious disposition  of  deducing  evil  only 
from  the  existence  of  objects  of  sense, 
must  easily  have  arisen  from  their  notion 
of  the  vXn  ;  and  aUhough  their  overprizing 
of  a  contemplative  Gnosis  must  have  been 
in  danger  of  becoming  prejudicial  to  the 
spirit  of  active  love. 

On  the  contrary,  the  other  sort  of 
Gnosis,  which  considered  the  Creator  of 
the  world  as  a  being  entirely  at  enmity 
with  the  Supreme  God  and  his  system, 
would  naturally  produce  a  wild,  dark 
I  hatred  of  the  world,  entirely  at  variance 
with  the  spirit  of  Christianity.  This  ex- 
j  hibited  itself  outwardly  in  two  ways;  it 
either  showed  itself  with  nobler  and  more 
rational  men  in  an  extravagantly  strict 
asceticism,  and  an  anxious  avoiding  of  all 
intercourse  with  the  world, — on  which, 
however  the  Christian  is  bound  to  exert 
a  forming  iiiduence,  and  then,  at  all  events, 
morality  would  be  a  thing  merely  of  a 
negative  kind;  nothing,  in  short,  but  a 
way  of  purification  as  a  preparation  for 


250 


DIFFERENT    VIEWS    OF    MARRIAGE. 


contemplation, — or  else  it  showed  itself 
in  men  of  an  impure  nature,  and  inclined 
to  wild  fancies,  and  in  men  of  ungoverned 
passions,  in  a  licentious  contem'pt  for  all 
jiioral  laws.  Wiien  once  these  Gnostics 
set  out  from  this  principle, — '  this  whole 
world  is  the  work  of  a  limited  ungodly 
spirit,  it  is  utterly  incapable  of  all  revela- 
tion of  the  Divinity,  and  we  higher  natures, 
who  belong  to  a  far  higher  world,  are  im- 
prisoned in  it,' — this  conclusion  would 
immediately  follow;  'Every  thing  out- 
ward is  utterly  and  entirely  indifferent  to 
the  inward  man;  nothing  of  an  higher 
nature  can  here  be  expressed,  and  the 
outward  man  may  give  himself  up  to 
every  kind  of  lust,  provided  the  inward 
man  be  not  thereby  disturbed  in  the  tran- 
quillity of  his  contemplation.  The  very 
means  by  which  we  must  prove  our  con- 
tempt and  our  defiance  of  this  wretched 
and  hostile  world,  is  by  not  suffering  our- 
selves to  be  affected  by  it  in  any  condition 
whatever.  The  means  by  which  we  must 
extinguish  the  empire  of  our  senses,  is  by 
remaining  undisturbed  in  our  tranquillity 
of  spirit,  while  we  give  ourselves  up  to 
every  kind  of  desire.  "  We  must  struggle 
against  our  lusts  by  the  indulgence  of 
them,"  said  these  freethinkers;  "  for  there 
is  nothing  great  in  abstaining  from  plea- 
sure, if  w^e  have  never  tried  it;  but  it 
argues  greatness  when  a  man  finds  him- 
self in  the  midst  of  pleasure,  and  yet  is 
not  overcome  by  it."*  The  heathen  phi- 
losopher Plotinus  makes  a  very  striking 
remark  against  these  men,  which  all,  who 
view  the  matter  even  from  the  ground  of 
Christianity,  must  recognise  as  true, 
namely,  that  while  they  venture  with 
more  boldness  than  Epicurus,  who  denied 
any  overruling  Providence  of  this  world, 
to  throw  out  the  same  accusations  that  he 
(lid,  they  must  necessarily  bring  men  to 
tlte  same  result^  in  regard  to  morals ;  which 
result  would  be  this:  "That  nothing  is 
left  for  us  here,  except  to  give  ourselves 
up  to  our  desires,  and  to  despise  all  tiie 

*  Clemens,  Stromata,  lib.  ii.  p.  411.  Porphyry 
de  Abstinentia  Carnis,  lib.  i.  §  40,  &c.,  paints  the 
notions  of  these  men  in  a  manner  quite  accordant 
with  that  of  Clemens.  "  It  is  only  some  little 
standing  water,"  say  they,  "which  can  be  defiled 
by  receivinK  into  it  something  unclean ;  not  the 
ocean,  which  receives  every  thine;,  because  it  knows 
its  own  greatness.  So  also  little  men  may  be  over- 
powered by  what  they  feed  upon,  but  not  he  who 
is  an  ocean  of  power  (j^ot/or/,  ajjparently  an  ex- 
pression jjeculiar  to  them,  founded  on  a  misuse 
of  that  of  St.  Paul  in  1  Cor.  viii.  9;  vi.  12,)  which 
receives  all  things  into  itself,  and  becomes  not  de- 
filed." 


j  laws   of  this  world,  and   all  morals,  for 

i  there  is  nothing  good  to  be  found  in  this 

j  abominable  world."* 

This  diflj3rence  is  also  shown  in  the 
consideration  of  individual  moral  rela- 
tions. The  Gnostics  of  the  latter  class 
either  prescribed  celibacy  and  abhorred 
marriage,  as  something  unclean  and  pro- 
fane, or  else,  according  to  the  principle 
that  every  thing  relating  to  the  senses  is 
entirely  indifferent,  and  that  people  here 
must  only  defy  the  Demiurgos  by  con- 

j  tempt  of  his  limiting  laws — they  justified 

I  the  indulgence  of  every  desire.  Those  of 
the  former  class,  on  the  contrary,  honoured 
marriage  as  an  holy  state,  by  which  the 
natural  state  of  man  was  to  be  ennobled. 
And  the  Valentinian  Gnosis,  in  fact,  as  it 
universally  considered  the  lower  world  as 
a  symbol  and  mirror  of  the  higher,  and  as 
it  sought  for  the  revelation  of  the  highest 
law  of  that  higher  system  in  the  different 
stages  of  existence  in  manifold  degrees, — 

I  so  also  it  recognised,  in  the  marriage" con- 
nection, the  image  of  a  higher  connection, 
which  runs  through  all  stages  of  existence, 
from  the  very  highest  link  of  the  whole 
chain.  (See  below.)  Besides,  the  influence 
of  the  originally  Jetoish  yiotions,  which 
were  inclined  to  prize  the  marriage  con- 
dition highly,  is  also  shown  here. 

The  difference  between  these  two  classes 
of  Gnosis  is  still  farther  brought  promi- 
nently forward  in  their  different  mode  of 
considering  the  person  of  Christ.  Jill 
Gjwstics,  however,  in  a  certain  respect 
agree  in  this,  that,  as  they  separated  the 
God  of  heaven  and  the  God  of  nature 
from  each  other,  and  as  they,  therefore, 
severed  also  the  invisible  and  the  visible 
system,  the  Divine  and  the  human,  too 
widely  from  each  other;  so  also  they 
would  not  recognise  the  union  of  the 
Divine  and  the  human  in  the  person  of 
Christ.  And  yet,  just  as  we  have  observed 
a  remarkable  difference  in  regard  to  the 
first  of  these  matters,  between  the  two 
chief  divisions  of  the  Gnostic  system,  we 

1  shall  also  be  able  to  remark  such  a  dif- 
ference in  regard  to  the  latter  of  them. 
We  shall  find  here  also  an  essential  gra- 
dation   in    the   views   entertained    of   tlie 

j  relation  between  the  Divine  and  the  hu- 
man in  Christ.  The  one  party,  indeed, 
recognised  the  manhood  of  Christ  as  real, 
and  also  conceded  to  it  a  certain  dignity, 
although,  as  they  made  two  Gods  out  of 
the  one  God  of  heaven  and  of  nature,  and 

;  *  See  the  excellent  argument  in  Plotinus, 
1  Ennead.  ii.  lib.  ix.  c.  15. 


CLASSIFICATION    OF    GNOSTICS.  251 

allowed  the  Creator  of  the  latter  to  be  only  1  C/<m//rtn(7y  only  an  insulated  fragment 
the  instrument  of  the  former,  they  also  I  in  the  history  of  man  ;  or,  as  we  may  ex- 
divided  the  one  Christ  into  two  Christs,  a  |  plain  it  more  shortly,  the  sects  2vhich 
higher  and  a  lower,  a  heaverdy  and  an  \  founded  their  viejcs  on  Judaism^  anil  those 
earthly  one,  in  such  a  manner,  that  the  which  set  themselves  entirely  at  enmity 
latter  was  merely  the  instrument  of  the  against  it*  It  is,  we  avow,  natural 
former;  and  these  two  they  held  were  not ;  enough,  that  between  these  opposite  ex- 
originally  indissolubly  bound  together,  but '  tremes  many  intermediate  opinions  should 
the  former  had  united  himself  to  the  latter,  be  found,  which  do  not,  however,  in- 
for  the  first  time,  at  tlie  baptism  in  the  validate  the  correctness  of  the  division, 
river  Jordan.  But  the  other  class  of  it  is  peculiarly  instructive  to  consider 
Gnostics,  as  they  denied  the  connection  '  the  mode  and  manner  by  which  these 
of  Christianity  with  Judaism,  and  with  all  '  Gnostics  were  able  to  come  to  tlie  persua- 
historical  development  of  God's  kingdom  sion,  tliat  their  doctrines,  so  foreign  to  the 
among  mankind,  and  as  they  made  out  of  simple  Gospel,  could  have  been  delivered 
the  God  of  Christ  and  of  the  Gospel  a  !  by  Clirist  and  the  aposdes,  and  how  they 
diflerent  God  from  tliat  of  nature  and  of  endeavoured  to  prove  this.  We  find  here 
history,  so  also  they  rejected  tlie  connec-  '  the  same  phenomena,  which,  arising  out 
tion  of  the  appearance  of  Christ  with  '  of  causes  that  lie  in  the  very  inmost 
nature  and  with  history.  Christ  did  not  nature  of  man,  were  often  repeated  in  fol- 
here,  (according  to  them,)  enter  into  na-  |  lowing  centuries.  With  a  ready-formed 
ture,  nor  into  the  historical  development '  Theosophic  system,  based  on  its  own 
of  human  nature.  The  view,  wliich  suited  j  fundamental  principles,  they  went  to  the 
the  fantastic  disposition  of  the  East,  and  '  Holy  Scriptures,  and  sought  to  find  in 
had  long  since  been  spread  abroad  among;  them  something  to  hang  theirsystem  upon, 
the  Jews,  namely,  that  a  higher  Spirit  j  And  this  they  might  easily  find,  because 
might' represent  itself^  to  the  eye  of  sense  i  they  were  wholly  unacquainted  with  the 
in  a  multitude  of  delusive  forms,*  which  {  rules  of  grammatical  and  logical  interpre- 
appeared  to  the  senses,  but  had  no  reality,  j  tation,|and  despised  attention  to  suchmat- 
— this  notion  was  applied  to  Christ,  and  ters  as  carnal.+  for  their  inward  intuition 
one  whole  essential  part  of  his  earthly  was  to  open  every  thing.  But  they  were 
existence  and  his  personality,  Avas  thus  I  punished  for  the  pride,  which,  trusting  to 
argued  away ;  the  lohole  of  his  human  a  certain  inward  light,  only  granted  to 
nature  was  denied;  the  whole  human  «j:>-  higher  natures  of  a  certain  class,  despised 
pearance  of  Christ  was  made  a  mere  do-  \  the  usual  human  means  of  knowldege. 
ceptice  appearancey  a  7ncre  vision — and  |  Therefore,  they  were  given  up  to  every 
this  was  Docetism^  the  direct  contrary  to  ;  kind  of  error  which  can  arise  from  the 
mere  Ebionitism,  wljich  would  recognise  want  of  considering  the  occasion  and  the 
nothing  but  the  human  in  Christ.  And  this  !  connection  in  which  any  thing  is  said,  from 
view  might,  at  last,  be  carried  so  far — as  it   the  confusion  hetween  different  meanings 

was  among  the  more  fanciful  Basilidians  i 

—as  exactly  to  despise  the  most  holy  I  ,  *  ™s  ^^j^'.^'O"  has  this  circumstance  in  its 
points  in  the  human  life  of  Jesus  in  lhe\^:^:^l'!^,!':^^^l}'l'^_^T'^_!^_}^^_V^ 
most  profane  manner. 


culiar  system  ofMarcion — which,  however, 
cessarily  connected  with  the  Gnostic  systems  only 
f)-oiii  one  side, — can  find  its  proper  place  among 
them.  Clement  of  Alexandria  in  a  certain  degree 
confirms  this  division,  when  he  calls  Valentinus 


The  Gnostic  systems  will  also  admit 
of  a  very  natural  division  into  two  classes 
by  means  of  their  most  essential  and  in-  _ 
fluential  differences.     The  first  class,  con-  I  [!^  >^^f'^9fr.fjmrrpiT/ii^,viu<vr,y  khv^txt^.  (Strom. 
•   .■  /.   ,1  ^.        I'l         ;  7    ,         lib.  VI.  641,) — the  leader  of  those  who  mamtam 

sisting  of  those  seeis  which  acknowledge   „  ^  /.,,  ,  ,•       ni    n-  ■, 

o  .  I        •  -17  7    ^      a  common  nource  of  the  revdati(ini)j  lite  Divimtu 

the  connection  betioeen  the  visible  and  the  amomr  mm,  and  do  not  deny  the  co.mection  of 
invisible  loorld, — beticeen  the  relation  of  Christianity  with  all  earlier  revelations  of  God. 
God  in  nature,  in  history,  and  in  Chris-  The  ^r^tj-fiiw.vTK  to  IS'it.v  t:i/  xP"''^''-^^'^f*"-"y  ^^lio 
tianity,  and  the  connection  between  the  \  ^o"''!  ""^  acknowledge  any  such  K-Av<,T-^i  between 
Old  and  theMw  Testament,  as  the  deve-    (^hristianity  and  any  other  revelation  whatever  of 

Divine  truth,  according  to  him,  also,  would  be  the 
contrast  to  this  class. 

■f  Grigen  (Philocal.  c.  14,)  shows  how  much 
strengthened  in  their  errors  the  Gnostics  were  by 
their  Seyvux  raiv  kcyuutv  in  their  interpretation  of 
•  My  readers  may  rememlwr  the  Indian  ]\Iaja,  j  the  Bible, 
and  many  other  Indian  Myths.  j      ^  Only  fit  for  the  ft';^;^^. 


lopment  of  one  whole  theocratical  scheme — 
and  the  second  class,  of  those  which  tear 
asunder  these  connections,  and  ichich  make 


252 


DOCTRINE    OF   ACCOMMODATION. 


of  a  icord*  from  the  want  of  distin- 
guishing leticccn  metaphorical  and  proper 
expressions^  and  from  the  arbitrary  appli- 
cation of  single  traits  in  comparison, 
u-ilhoui  regard  to  that  which  constitutes  the 
real  points  of  comparison.  The  subjective 
caprice  of  the  imaginative  faculty,  of  the 
feelings,  and  of  speculation,  without  an 
objective  law,  proceeding  from  the  appli- 
cation of  the  rules  of  thought  and  lan- 
guage, might  find  whatever  it  chose  in  the 
Scriptures  and  introduce  it  into  them. 
The  Parables,  for  the  simplicity  and  prac- 
tical depth  of  which  they  had  no  feeling, 
M'ere,  therefore,  peculiarly  acceptable  to 
them,  because  an  arbitrary  interpretation, 
when  they  had  once  put  the  real  point  of 
comparison  gut  of  their  view,  had  the 
freest  play  here.  But  contention  against 
the  arbitrary  biblical  interpretation  of  the 
Gnostics  had  also  the  advantageous  effect, 
that  it  made  their  opponents  attentive  to 
the  necessity  of  a  more  accurate  gram- 
juatical  and  logical  interpretation  of  the 
Bible,  and  induced  them  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  first  Hermeneutic  Canons, 
as  we  may  observe  from  various  proofs 
in  the  writings  of  Irenajus,  TertuUian, 
Clemens,  and  Origen. 

The  bolder  among  the  Gnostics  used  a 
theory  of  interpretation  likely  to  lead  to 
arbitrary  principles  of  criticism.  They 
said, — Christ  and  the  apostles  spoke  ac- 
cording to  the  different  conditions  and 
views  of  the  man  to  whom  they  spoke  ; 
they  took  these  different  positions  them- 
selves. With  the  -i^vx^^oi — those  who 
were  in  the  condition  of  a  blind  unintel- 
lectual  faith  (those  who  were  fettered 
by  Jewish  prejudices) — they  spoke  only 
of  a  Dcmiurgos,  because  their  limited 
natures  could  not  understand  any  thing 
higher.  (The  Gnostics  are  the  fathers  of 
the  theory  of  an  accommodation  as  used 
in  the  Christian  Church.,  in  an  exegetical 
jjoirit  of  view,  although  of  itself  the 
theory  of  an  accommodation  is  as  old 
as  the  diflerence  between  an  esoteric 
and  an  exoteric  religious  system.)  The 
liigher  truths  from  the  world  of  iEons, 
and  those  above  that  world,  they  (i.  e. 
Chirst  and  the  apostles,)  had  (according 
to    this  view,)  communicated  only  to  a 


*  As,  for  example,  where  they  found  the  word 
"  world"  used  with  blame  in  the  New  Testament, 
these  passages  served  them  for  a  proof,  that  this 
whole  creation  is  something  imperfect,  and  could 
not  come  from  the  supreme  and  perfect  (lod  ;  for 
it  never  entered  into  their  heads,  that  the  word 
"  world"  might  be  used  in  the  New  Testament  in 
a  diiVerent  sense. 


small  circle  of  initiated  men,  who  were 
capable  of  receiving  such  truths  in  virtue 
of  their  higher  spiritual  natures  (as  tthv- 
fA.oe.riy.oi,)  and  these  truths  they  indicated 
only  in  detached  images  and  hints,  which 
could  be  understood  by  none  but  such 
natures.  That  higher  wisdom  they  had 
delivered  (as  St.  Paul  says,  1  Cor.  ii.6,) 
only  orally  among  the  perfect,  and  only 
orally  was  it  forever  to  be  propagated  in 
the  narrow  circle  of  the  initiated. 

The  knowledge  of  this  secret  tradition, 
therefore,  first  gives  the  true  key  of  the 
deeper  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures, 
Irenajus  says,  on  the  contrary,*  "  For 
the  apostles,  who  were  sent  forth  to  find 
the  wandering,  and  to  give  sight  to  those 
who  saw  not,  and  to  heal  the  sick,  did 
not  address  them  in  language  suited  to 
their  then  notions,  but  according  to  the 

revelation   of   truth For 

what  physician  who  wishes  to  heal  the 
sick,  would  act  according  to  the  desires 
of  the  sick  man,  and  not  according  to  that 
which  is  proper  to  cure  him  ?  .  .  .  . 
yThe  apostles,  who  are  the  disciples  of 
the  truth,  are  far  from  all  lies ;  for  a  lie 
has  nothing  in  coiiimon  with  the  truth, 
any  more  than  darkness  with  light.  .  . 
.  .  .  .  Our  Lord,  who  is  the  truth, 
lied  not." 

Or  else  they  said,  "  From  the  account 
of  the  apostles  itself,  we  cannot  learn  the 
pure  doctrine  of  Christ,  for  the  apostles 
were  fettered  by  psychical,  and  Jewish 
opinions;  and  the  Pneumaticus  (i.  e.  the 
spiritual  man,)  must  separate  the  psy- 
chical from  the  pneumatical  in  their  writ- 
ings." Or  they  even  ventured  to  sepa- 
rate, in  the  very  discourses  of  Christ  him- 
self what  the  psychical  Christ  spoke 
in  him  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Demi- 
urgos, — what  the  Divine  wisdom,  still 
hovering  between  the  dominion  of  the 
Demiurgos  and  the  Pleroma,  and  not  yet 
arrived  at  its  full  perfection,+ — and  what 
the  highest  kjkj,  uttered  from  out  the 
Pleroma.§ 

If  these  Gnostics  had  been  thinkers  of 
the  same  sort  with  the  people  of  the 
western  world,  they  would  have  separated 
in  their  composite  (construirten)  Christ 
what  he  said  under  the  influence  of  im- 
mediate inspiration,  out  of  an  intuition 
elevating  itself  above  all  that  belongs  to 


*  Contra  Jlseres.  iii.  5. 

f  [This  passage,  in  the  original,  precedes  the 
rest  of  the  quotation — H.  J.  R.] 

i  "  Sophia,"  or  "Achamoth."     See  below. 
§  See  Irenoeus,  lib.  iii.  c.  2. 


GNOSTICISM   FAVOURED    BY    PRIDE. 


time ;  and  what  he  said  speaking  from  a 
reflection  disturbed  by  ideas  belonging  to 
time  ;  but  they  wouhl  only  have  been 
expressing  the  same  notions  in  diflerent 
language. 

These  Gnostics  were,  in  part,  not 
thoroughly  resolved  to  break  from  the 
rest  of  the  Church,  and  to  found  separate 
communities.  They  were,  indeed,  per- 
suaded that  the  4'f%t'<ot,  as  they  were  con- 
ditioned, could  receive  Christianity  in  no 
other  than  the  churchly  form  ;  that  they 
could  arrive  at  no  higher  degree  than  that 
of  faith  upon  authority,  that  their  faculty 
for  the  higher  spiritual  intuition  was 
utterly  gone,  and  therefore,  they  wished 
not  to  disturb  these  men,*  whose  views 
were  more  of  the  common  ecclesiastical 
kind,  in  their  tranquil  faith, — but  tliey 
wished,  after  grafting  themselves  upon 
the  conmion  Church  assemblies,  to  found, 
in  connection  with  them,  a  kind  of  theo- 
sophic  schools,  and  of  Christian  myste- 
ries, into  which  all  those  in  whom  they 
believed  they  could  observe  that  higher 
faculty,  not  conceded  to  all,  might  be  re- 
ceived. They  made  complaints  also  that 
men  would  not  suffer  them  to  remain  in 
the  communion  of  the  Church,  and  called 
them  heretics,  Avhereas  they  entirely 
agreed  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.| 

But  what  would  have  become  of  the 
Church,  if  this  intention  of  theirs,J  of  ex- 
tending themselves  in  the  Church  by  this 
distinction  of  two  different  stages  of  reli- 
gion, had  succeeded }  How  deeply  would 
it  have  injured  the  simplicity,  the  confi- 
dence, and  the  clearness,  of  the  Christian 
faith,  the  practical  spirit  of  Christianity, 
the  bond  of  Christian  communion  that 
unites  all  hearts,  and  reason  also  which 
attains  the  development  due  to  its  nature 
in  the  light  of  Christianity,  while  it  is 
conscious  to  itself  of  its  natural  limits,, — 
limits  which  a  presumptuous  intellectual 
intuition  pretended  to  pass  over.§  But  the 


*   Touc  Kt/Vii^c  iiMKiKrtoLc-'riiuiii;. 

■\  Queruntur  de  nobis,  quod  cum  similia  no- 
biscum  sentiant,  sine  causa  abstineamus  nos  a 
communicatione  eorum,  et  cum  eadem  dicant  et 
eandcm  habeant  doctrinam,  vocemus  illos  here- 
ticos.     Iren.  lib.  iii.  c.  1.5. 

^  In  which  they  themselves  were  conscious  of 
no  impropriety,  because  this  sort  of  proceeding 
was  founded  on  the  entice  view  wliich  they  enter- 
tained of  religion. 

§  The  doctrine  of  Plotinus, — ro  it  iyTVif  mi/v,  ;!/« 
'iTTCv  i^ce  rou  v.u  to  Tnrm, — is  quite  just,  in  as  far  as 
it  opposes  the  Gnostics,  who  spoke  of  a  higher 
origan  than  reason  for  the  knowlcdi^e  of  the  Divine 
nature,  that  is  to  say,  the  ^rveu^wjiTutdv,  a  faculty 
which  resided  only  in  certain  natures.     But  this 


253 


spirit  of  Christianity,  as  we  shall  see  when 
we  come  to  consider  the  theological  de- 
velopmeitt  of  spiritual  knowledge  in  the 
Church,  awakened  two  different  disposi- 
tions, which,  uniting  in  this  warfare,  op- 
posed Gnosticism. 

That  Avhich  procured  an  entrance  for 
Gnosticism,  was  a  pride  (founded,  we 
confess,  on  one  side  in  human  nature,) 
which  has  always  especially  contributed 
to  further  those  dispositions  which  are  not 
willing  to  content  themselves  with  that 
which  is  simple,  but  are  always  anxious 
to  have  something  of  their  own,  which 
sets  them  above  others,  a  pride  whicli 
finds  it  very  hard  to  let  itself  down  so  far, 
as  simply  to  receive  and  accept^  together 
with  the  rest  of  mankind.  Irenreus  and 
Plotinus,  two  men  of  such  thoroughly 
different  characters,  both  point  out  to  us 
how  the  pride  of  human  nature  is  flattered 
by  the  phantasies  of  the  Gnostics.  The 
former  says,*  "  He  who  has  given  himself 
up  to  them  becomes  instantly  puf!cd  up; 
he  believes  himself  to  be  neither  in  heaven 
nor  on  earth,  but  to  have  entered  into 
the  Pleroma,  and  carries  himself  most 
proudly."  And  Plotinus  says,  "  Irrational 
men  are  at  once  caught  by  such  speeches 
as  these :  '  Thou  shalt  become  better,  not 
only  than  all  men  but  than  all  Gods  also," 
for  great  is  the  pride  of  men.  The  man 
who  was  before  humble  and  discreet,  now 
hears  with  pleasure — '  Thou  art  a  son  of 
God,"!"  but  the  rest,  whom  thou  lookest 
up  to  with  admiration,  are  no  sons  of 
God;  thou  art  also  higher  than  heaven, 
without  doing  any  thing  for  that  pur- 
pose.' " 

On  the  other  hand,  as  it  usually  happens 
that  every  prevailing  error  of  any  age  has 
its  opposite  in  another  error,  by  which  it 
has  been  called  forth,  and  the  combating 
of  which  lends  it  a  plausible  appearance ; 
and  as,  for  the  most  part,  it  happens  that 
whenever  any  false  tendency  spreads  itself 
abroad  among  one  part  of  mankind,  it  has 


prnposition  is  fake  when  it-  is  used,  as  in  the 
notions  of  Plotinus  it  might  be,  to  oppose  Chris- 
tianity in  general,  which  gave  us  an  objective 
source  of  knoivhdfre  of  Divine  things,  elevated 
above  human  reason,  in  a  revelation  of  God,  from 
which  reason,  as  an  organ  (or  instrument)  is  to 
draw  (its  knowledge)  under  the  illumination  of  a 
higher  Spirit. 

*  Lib.  iii.  c.  15.  [This  passage  is  paraphrased, 
but  not  translated,  by  Neander ;  in  fact,  the  first 
part  of  it  almost  baffles  translation.  Wo  must 
remember  that  part  of  Irenaeus  has  descended  to 
us  only  in  a  Latin  translation. — H.  J.  K.] 

\  A  TrvBJU'jLTiKoi:,  who  alone  could  descend  im- 
mediately from  the  Supreme  God. 


UNSATISFIED    LONGINGS. CERINTHUS. 


254 

for  its  foundation  some  truth,  which  is 
misunderstood,  and  partially  conceived, 
and  some  want  of  human  nature,  which, 
in  itself,  and  of  itself,  is  real,  but  has  been 
led  astray, — so  it  happened  here  also.  It 
was  opposition  against  a  gross  and 
sensuous  conception  of  Divine  things, 
among  the  Jews  and  Christians,  which 
called  forth  Gnosticism;  and  it  furthered 
its  propagation  the  more,  because  Chris- 
tianity had  awakened  also  new  spiritual 
wants,  which  could  fnid  no  satisfaction  in 
a  mere  faith  founded  on  authority,  which 
despised  every  thing  ideal,  cast  away  from 
it  all  higher  contemplation  and  intuition, 
and  abruptly  rejected  all  speculation,  li' 
the  Gnostics  did  imagine  faith  so  mean 
a  thing,  and  if  they  did  not  attain  to  a 
knowledge  of  what  it  is  in  vital  Chris- 
tianity, and  in  the  ideas  of  St.  Paul,  they 


led  astray,  and  took  a  false  and  destruc- 
tive turn,  because  they  would  not  know 
Christianity  from  its  own  peculiar  and  es- 
sential nature,  because  they  mixed  hetero- 
geneous elements  with  Christianity,  which 
is  complete  and  sufficient  in  itself,  because 
they  did  not  regard  the  natural  limits  of 
human  knowledge,  and  because  they  were 
unable  to  perceive  the  limits  which  be- 
long to  religion,  and  those  which  belong 
to  knowledge.  Their  tremendous  errors 
stand  in  history  as  an  instructive  warning 
and  example. 

After  these  general  reflections,  we  now 
proceed  to  the  individual  Gnostic  sects, 
and,  according  to  the  division  which  has 
appeared  the  most  suitable,  we  shall  first 
speak  of  those  Gnostic  sects  loJiich,  en- 
grafting themselves  on  Judaism,  supposed 

gradual  development  of  the  theocracy  to 


may  have  been  induced  to  such  a  course   take  place  in  mankind,  proceeding  from 
by  their  opposition  to   men,  who  either 
did  not  in  their  lives  manifest  the  true 


power  of  faith,  by  showing  that  it  was  an 

animating  principle  of  life,  or  at  least  did 

not  understand  how  to  show,  in  its  full 

development,  the  truth,  that  faith  is  some- 
thing more   than    a  mere   belief  on   the 

strength  of  authority,  and   than  a  mere 

subjection  to  outward  authority,  that  it  is 

an  inward,  living  disposition  and  an  inward 

principle  of  life,  the  source  of  a  new  life 

within. 

Many  have  been  led  to  Gnosticism  by 

an  unsatisfied  desire  after  a  deeper  Chris- 
tian knowledge,  and  after  a  knowledge 

of  the  inward  organic  connection  of  the 

doctrines  of  Christianity.*    The  Gnostics 

made  the    first  attempt  to  develope  the 

Christian  doctrine  as  a  whole,  and  in  its 

individual  parts,  according  to  their  interior 

connection,  and  to  form  out  of  Christianity 

a  continued  and  connected  mode  of  view- 
ing divine  and  human  things.  The  desire 

and  endeavour  after  an  inward  connection 

and  an  inward  unity  of  knowledge,  is  not  to 

be  mistaken  among  them ;  although  we  ac- 
knowledge this  endeavour  of  theirs,  which 

in  one  point  of  view  was  right,  was  sadly  j  a^cise  from  a  mixture  of  Jewish  theosophy 

.  with  Christianity. 

The  most  striking  contradiction  be- 
tween the  accounts  of  the  doctrines  of 
Cerinthus  appears  to  lie  in  this;  that 
lrena!us  makes  him  out  a  complete  Gnos- 
tic, while  the  Presbyter  Cains  of  Rome, 
who  wrote  at  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, and  Dionysius,  bishop  of  Alexan- 
dria, after  the  middle  of  the  third  century, 

•  See  Acts  XX.  29.  Comp.  1,  and  2,  Epistles 
to  Timothy,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Coloasians. 


one  original  foundation. 

($.)  Tlie  individiud  sects. 

(1.)  77ie  Gnostics,  whose  system  was  engrafted 
071  Judaism. 

(a.)  Cerinthus. 

As  the  doctrine  of  this  Gnostic  shows 
us  clearly  how  Gnosis  formed  itself  out 
of  Judaism,  he  forms  the  natural  transi- 
tion-point from  the  Judaizing  sects  to  the 
Gnostics.  In  the  accounts  which  remain 
to  us  of  his  opinions,  we  find  contradic- 
tions and  difficulties  which  can  only  be 
explained  by  taking  a  just  view  of  the 
manner  in  which  Gnosticism  was  deduced 
from  Judaism.  Cerinthus,  according  to 
an  old  tradition  which  we  have  no  valid 
reason  to  doubt,  lived  at  Ephesus  at  the 
same  time  with  St.  John.  He  lived  in 
those  regions,  where  corruptions  of  Chris- 
tianity had  already  in  early  times  threat- 
ened Christianity;  which  were,  however, 
different  corruptions  from  those*  with 
which  Christianity  had  to  contend  in  its 
very  birth,  and  which  proceeded  from  a 
Pharisaical  Judaism,  while   these   rather 


*  As  Ambrosius,  of  whom  and  to  whom  the 
great  Oriajen  (who  converted  him  from  the  errors 
of  Gnosticism,)  said :  "  From  want  of  persons  who 
preach  the  better  truths,  while  you  could  not,  out 
of  your  love  to  Jesus,  bear  an  unreasonable  and 
ignorant  folth  (at/T6c  yow  >  Trc^iaToi*  Tr^itrffiw.yTm  ru 

KfilTTCVCt,  /MO  tfl^aiV  TDV  (  /vSJ-iV  KM  iJioniKy.v  mtTTiy,  if/* 

Tuv  TTKc  Tcv  ^U^ivv  ly^TTuv.)  you  pavc  yours<'lf  up 
formerly  to  doctrines  which  afterwards,  using  the 
understanding  bestowed   upon  you  rightly,  you  : 
knew  to  be  erroneous,  and  cast  away." — Origen.  I 
T.  V.  Joh.  towards  the  end.  1 


CERINTHUS. BAPTISM    OF    OUR   LORD. 


ascribe  to  him  a  gross  sensual  Chiliasm, 
whicli  bears  upon  it  the  garb  of  the  carnal 
notions  of  Judaism.  We  might,  however, 
bring  these  two  accounts  nearer  to  each 
other,  if  we  were  at  liberty  to  subtract  a 
little  from  each.  It  may  easily  have  hap- 
pened to  Jrenaeus,  that,  where  he  found  a 
few  traits  resembling  Gnosticism,  he  made 
out  of  them  a  whole  Gnostic  system.  To 
the  Presbyter  Caius,  as  a  zealous  opponent 
of  Chiliasm,  every  thing  was  welcome 
which  could  serve  to  place  Chiliasm  in 
an  unfavourable  point  of  view;  and  cer- 
tainly he  was  not  inclined  to  explain  the 
expressions  of  a  system  whicti  he  detested, 
in  the  mildest  manner;  and  was  the  less 
likely  to  do  so,  because  these  expressions 
might  easily  be  misunderstood  by  a  per- 
son not  accustomed  to  the  .Jewish-Orien- 
tal mode  of  speaking  allegorically.  And 
besides,  it  was  natural  that  Irena^us,  in 
whose  persuasion  a  belief  in  Chiliasm 
was  necessary  to  a  perfect  orthodoxy, 
should  not  quote  such  a  view  among  the 
pecidiar  opinions  of  a  Gnostic,  whom  he 
hated.  We  shall  now  endeavour,  from 
the  fragments  which  we  can  gather  from 
the  above  cited  reports,  compared  with 
the  account  of  Epiphanius,  to  put  together. 
a  whole. 

According  to  Irenaeus,*Cerinthus  taught 
that  the  w'orld  was  created  by  a  powerf 
quite  subordinate  to  the  highest  God, 
which  did  not  even  so  much  as  know  this 
God  who  was  elevated  above  every  thing. 
According  to  Epiphanius,^  he  held  that 
the  world  was  created  by  angels.  The 
Jewish  element,  which  is  the  foundation 
of  all  this,  is  here  easily  recognised;  he 
thought  that  the  God,§  who  was  elevated 
above  all  contact  with  material  things, 
and  vvho  came  not  forth  from  the  hidden 
recesses  of  his  incomprehensible  nature, 
had  created  this  world  by  means  of  min- 
istering angels.  He  supposed,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  Jewish  theories,  different 
ranks  and  degrees  in  the  higher  world  of 
spirit^;,  and  ascribed  to  the  angels  or 
powers,  through  which  God  had  created 
earthly  things,  a  lower  stage  in  this  gra- 
dation ;  just  as  he  chose  to  place  earthly 
things,  without  denying  their  divine 
origin,   yet   far   below   heavenly  things. 

*  The  passage  which  is  most  to  be  used  for  this 
purpose,  hcin?  that  in  which  Ircnseus  mixes  up 
Cerinthus  less  than  elscwiiere,  with  other  Gnostics, 
is  lib.  i.  26. 

-{■  Virtus, /wa^i.-,  nTl^JI'  ^  terminus  tech, 

cus  of  .Fcwish  theology. 
i   Hreres.  8,  or  28. 
§  'I'he  if  of  Phtio. 


255 


Perhaps  he  did  not  teach,  that  iliose 
angels  did  not  know  the  Supreme  God  ; 
but  only  that  they  had  a  very  imperfect 
knowledge  of  God,  and  of  the  highest 
heave  s,  and  not  the  perfect  knowledge 
which  was  first  to  be  communicated  by 
the  revelation  of  the  Divine  Logos.  At 
the  head  of  these  angels,  Cerinthus  (ac- 
cording to  Irena;us)  placed  a  power, 
which  was  taken  from  among  them,  an(l 
presided  over  them.  lie  maintained  alst), 
according  to  the  apparently  common  re- 
presentation of  the  Jews,  that  the  Mosaic 
law  had  been  revealed  by  means  of  this 
angel.*  While  he  said  this,  he  still  de- 
sired strictly  to  bring  forward  and  elevate 
the  dignity  of  the  Mosaic  law,  as  com- 
pared with  all  human  systems,  and  all 
other  national  religions  :  but  then  when 
compared  willi  the  revelation  of  the  3Ies- 
siah,  he  desired  to  sink  this  same  law  as 
low  as  the  angels  are  below  the  highest 
Logos.  In  his  doctrine  as  to  the  person 
of  the  Messiah,  he  was  in  some  respects 
entirely  inclined  to  cling  to  the  usual 
Jewish  notion.  (See  above.)  The  man 
Jesus  was  (in  this  view)  a  son  of  Joseph 
and  Mary,  begotten  in  the  natural  way, 
provided  with  no  sort  of  miraculous  gifts, 
who  had  distinguished  himself  O'om  the 
rest  of  the  Jews  only  by  a  superior  de- 
gree of  obedience  to  the  lawf  and  wisdom. 
By  these  qualities  he  made  himself  worthy 
of  being  chosenj  from  among  all  mankind 
as  the  Messiah.  He  himself  knew  nothing 
of  this  destination  appointed  for  him  ;  this 
was  first  revealed  to  him  in  his  baptism  by 
John,  at  the  time  destined  to  his  consecra- 
tion for  the  office  of  Messiah,  and  at  the 
same  time  he  was  furnished  with  thepov/ers 
necessary  to  him  for  the  fulfilment  of  this 
destination.  That  Supreme  Logos  or 
Spirit  of  God§  appeared  and  descended 
from  the  heavens  which  opened  above 
Jesus,  in  the  radiant  form  of  a  dove,  and 
it  sunk  down  into  the  heart  of  Jesus.  The 
narrative  given  in  an  Ebionite  recension 
of  the  ^vcx.yyi>.iot  v.a9'  "E^gatou?,  where  it 
is  said, II  "  While   the  people  were  being 


*  According  to  Epiphanius,  by  one  of  those, 
perhaps  the  presiding  one,  to  whom,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Supreme  God  on  this  stage  of 
being,  the  guidance  of  the  people  consecrated  to 
God,  was  especially  confided. 

•j-  By  StK^Ktrvyn  in  its  usual  Jewish  sense. 

i  Tit  6iKcyri  X^/cTTic. 

§  It  is  quite  allowable  to  suppose  that  Cerin- 
thus, like  many  Jewish  theologians,  considered 
the  ?r\Bjfj.^  ayioi  and  the  Kcyc;  as  identical. 

n  [This  extract  is  taken  from  Kpi[)hanius 
Hseres.  xxx.  Ebion.  §  19,  and  is  printed  in  Grabe 
Spicilegium  Palrum  Sseculi  I.  p.  27. — II.  J.  K.] 


CHRISTOLOGY    AND   JUDAISM    OF    CERINTHUS. 


256 

baptized,  Jesus  came  and  suffered  himself 
to  be  baptized  by  Jolin,"  (probably  with- 
out being  conscious  that  he  was  different 
from  the  rest  of  those  baptized  by  John, 
or  that  any  thing  peculiar  would  take 
place  in  regard  to  him,)  "-and  when  he 
came  forth  from  the  water,  the  heavens 
were  opened,  and  he  saw  the  Holy  Spirit 
of  God,  in  the  form  of  a  dove,  descending 
and  entering  into  him."*  (The  luminous 
form  descended  visibly  upon  his  head, 
and  entered  into  him.  It  now  disap- 
peared ;  a  proof  that  the  Holy  Spirit  or 
Logos  had  wholly  united  itself  with  his 
person.)  "  And  there  was  a  voice  from 
heaven  which  said,  Thou  art  my  beloved 
Son,  in  thee  I  am  \vell  pleased;"  and 
again,  "  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee  ;"t 
that  is  to  say,  I  have  brought  thee  to  the 
dignity  of  a  Son,  that  is  of  the  Messiah,  by 
means  of  the  connection  with  this  Spirit 
of  God ;  "  and  immediately  there  shone 
around  a  great  light."J  By  means  of  a 
connection  with  this  Supreme  Spirit,  Jesus 
now  first  attained  to  a  rank,  a  power,  and 
a  wisdom,  elevated  above  this  whole 
world,  and  the  angels  that  preside  over  it. 
He  now  first  attained  to  the  perfect  know- 
ledge of  the  Supreme  God,  and  of  hea- 
venly thhigs.  JYow  the  angels  themselves 
might  learn  from  his  revelations ;  and 
now  he  performs  miracles  by  the  Divine 
power  of  this  Spirit  which  is  united  to 
him.  This  is  that  which  used  him  as  its 
instrument  in  every  thing;  this  is  the 
TTvivfjict  rov  X^ia-Tov,  the  Messiah  himself, 
in  the  highest  sense  of  the  word.§  The 
idea  of  a  Messiah,  who  should  redeem  by 
means  of  his  sufferings,  did  not  suit  the 
notions  of  a  Cerinthus,  who  had  no  feeling 
for  the  Divine  nature  in  the  form  of  a 
servant,  and  who  was  attached  to  the  im- 
posing grandeur  of  a  magical  and  theoso- 
phic  system.il  I"  union  with  the  mighty 
Spirit  of  God,  Jesus  could  not  have  suf- 
fered :  by  this  union  he  must  necessarily 
have  triumphed  over  all  his  enemies. 
The  very  fact  of  suffering  is  of  itself  a 


*  EiSi  TO  TrvWfjt-'Ji  Tit/  Qiciv  TO  ayiov,  h  uSu  cripi^iifAt 
K!frixbr,v7»i;  K-JU  itcihBcu^x;  ik  auT'-v. 

"[■  tyai  uajumv  ytyftviiKH  erf. 

i  [I  have  distinguished  the  parts  which  occur 
in  the  Greek  text  by  inverted  commas ;  the  rest  is 
the  interpretation  put  upon  it  by  Neander,  which 
is  hardly  distinguished  enough  in  the  German.  It 
contains  his  view  of  the  interpretation  the  Gnos- 
tics  put  upon  this  passage. — H.  J.  R.] 

§  The  am  K^icrroi,  the  Xpia-rct  4Tot/pav;of ,  of  whom 
Jesus  was  only  the  human  instrument,  the  xjit* 

Xg'^'TCf. 

II  [Literally,  who  loved  magic-theosophic  gran- 
deur.-H.  J.  JR.] 


proof  that  the  Spirit  of  God  which  was 
united  with  him,  had  been  beforehand 
separated  from  him,  and  had  gone  up 
again  to  the  Father.  To  the  suffering  of 
the  mifn,  now  left  to  himself,  Cerinthus 
apparently  ascribed  no  part  of  the  re- 
demption.* 

According  to  Epiphanius,  this  theo- 
sophist,  who  arranged  every  thing  anew 
so  as  to  suit  his  own  notions,  denied  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  hi  pur- 
suance of  this  idea  ]?e  may  have  supposed 
that  the  Divine  Logos  would  unite  itself 
again  to  the  man  Jesus,  only  when  it  was 
about  to  appoint  him  the  victorious  king 
of  the  Messiah's  kingdom,  and  to  raise 
up  all  the  faithful  with  him  to  take  their 
share  in  that  kingdom.  The  account  of 
Epiphanius,  however,  is  not  entirely  to  be 
relied  on :  because  as  he  proceeded  on 
the  supposition  that  St.  Paul  was  contend- 
ing in  every  place  against  the  followers 
of  Cerinthus,  he  may  have  attributed  to 
Cerinthus  a  doctrine  which  he  did  not 
hold,  in  consequence  of  the  passage  in 
1  Cor.  XV. 

Cerinthus  further  agreed  with  the 
Ebionites  in  holding  the  perpetual  obli- 
gation of  the  Mosaic  law,  in  a  certain 
sense,  upon  Christians.  He  might  well 
suppose  that  the  highest  meaning  of  Ju- 
daism, which  was  not  clearly  known 
even  to  the  lawgiving  angel  himself,  the 
lov^ciia-[A.o<;  7rv£v^aTJxo?,  the  heavenly  Ju- 
daism, which  was  shadowed  forth  by  the 
earthly,  had  been  first  revealed  by  the 
revelation  of  the  Logos,  and  that  yet  that 
earthly  and  shadowy  form  was  still  to 
last  till  the  triumphant  approach  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  or  to  the  begin- 
ning of  a  new  and  heavenly  order  of 
things.  But  as  Epiphanius  says  of  him, 
that  he  partlyf  held  fast  to  Judaism,  ^ml 
it  is  not  likely  that  the  latter  should  have 
invented  any  thing  of  this  sort;  we  may 
conclude  from  it,  that  Cerinthus  did  not 
look  on  every  thing  in  Judaism  as  equally 
divine;  and  that  in  some  degree,  like  the 
author  of  the  Clementine,  and  many 
other  mystic  sects  of  the  Jews,  he  made 
a  distinction  between  an  original  Judaism, 
and  the  latter  corruptions  of  it ;  and  that 
he  insisted  on  the  continued  obligation 
only  of  that  part  of  the  ceremonial  law 
which  he  considered  as  among  the  genuine 
parts  of  it.  As  a  sort  of  middle  and 
transition  point  from  the  earthly  system  of 
the  world  to  the  new,  eternal,  heavenly 

•   See  p.  257,  under  the  head  Basilidcs. 


CHILIASM. BASILIDES. DIVINE    ENERGIES. HIS    OGDOAD. 


257 


system,  Cerinthus,  with  many  Jewish 
theologists,  supposed  a  thousand-year 
season  of  happiness,  under  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Messiah  rendered  triumphant 
tlirough  the  power  of  the  Logos,  which 
was  to  take  place  in  Jerusalem  as  the 
centre  point  of  the  ennobled  earth.  A 
too  literal  interpretation  of  the  passage  in 
Vs.  xc.  4,  led  people  to  suppose,  that  as  a 
thousand  years  in  the  sight  of  God  are 
but  as  one  day,  the  world  would  last 
in  its  present  state  six  thousand  years ; 
and  then  at  the  conclusion  of  the  earthly 
course,  a  Sabbath  (a  lime  of  undisturbed 
blessing)  of  a  thousand  years  would  take 
place  on  earth  for  the  pious,  now  delivered 
from  all  struggles.  We  are  certainly  in- 
clined to  ask,  whether  he  made  to  him- 
self so  gross  and  carnal  a  representation 
of  the  blessings  of  this  thousand-years' 
Sabbath,  as  Caius  and  Dionysius  accuse 
him  of,  which  does  not  appear  to  har- 
monize well  with  the  general  character 
of  his  opinions.  He  spoke  of  a  marriage 
feast,  which  was  at  that  time  an  image 
commonly  used  to  represent  the  happy 
union  of  the  Messiah  with  his  own  peo- 
ple ;*  but  those  who  explained  his  words 
with  a  feeling  of  bitterness  against  him, 
might  misinterpret  such  images.  Diony- 
sius says,  that  when  he  spoke  of  fasts 
and  sacrifices,  he  was  only  endeavouring 
to  gloss  over  his  gross  and  carnal  repre- 
sentations. But  what  was  there  to  justify 
him  in  this  declaration  ?| 

(b.)  Basilides. 
We  pass  now  from  Cerinthus  to  Ba- 
silides, who  wrote  in  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century.  It  is  most  probable  that 
Alexandria  was  the  sphere  of  his  activity  ; 
the  stamp  of  an  Alexandrian  Jewish  edu- 
cation cannot  be  mistaken  in  him  and  in 
his  son  Isidore,  whose  name  points  out 
his  Egyptian  birth.  But  the  account  of 
Epiphanius,  that  Syria,  the  general  birth- 
place of  Gnostic  systems,  was  also  the 
native  land  of  Basilides,  is  not  in  itself 
improbable,  although  it  is  on  the  other 
hand  not  a  sufficient  proof  The  doc- 
trines of  emanation  and  dualism  were  the 
foundation  of  his  system;  at  the  fountain 
head  of  these  emanations  he  placed  the 


hidden  God,  elevated  above  all  represen- 
tations and  images.*  The  middle  point 
between  this  incomprehensible  origin  and 
all  following  developments  of  life,  is  the 
unfolding  of  that  Being  in  his  several 
powers  which  individualize  themselves, 
and  become  in  fact,  so  many  names  of 
the  unnameable  Being.  Man  can  only 
think  on  God  after  the  analogy  of  his  oivn 
spirit ;  and  an  objective  truth  forms  the 
foundation  of  that  analogy,  inasmuch  as 
the  spirit  of  man  is  the  image  of  God. 
He  can  form  to  himself  no  representation 
of  the  most  perfect  Being,  without  break- 
ing the  idea  of  the  most  perfect,  which 
resides  within  his  spirit,  into  the  several 
parts  of  which  it  consists  •,  and  he  feels 
himself  compelled  to  distinguish  the 
several  attributes  of  this  most  perfect 
Being,  in  order  to  make  this  idea  compre- 
hensible to  himself:  but  a  deep  thinker 
is  well  convinced,  that  this  is  merely  a 
necessary  expedient  to  assist  human  im- 
perfection, and  knows  how  to  distinguish 
that  which  is  objective,  from  that  which 
is  subjective.  And  yet  the  Gnostic  was 
not  capable  of  entering  into  this  distinc- 
tion :  what  is  necessary  to  human  concep- 
tions^ he  attributed  to  the  objective  de- 
velopment of  existence  ;  as  thus  : — in 
order  to  bring  forth  life  out  of  himself, 
the  Being  which  contains  all  perfection 
within  himself,  must  first  unfold  himself 
into  the  several  qualities  which  the  idea 
of  absolute  perfection  contains ;  and  then, 
instead  of  the  abstract  conception  of  attri- 
butes, that  suits  not  with  Oriental  habits 
of  thought,  there  come  livings  personi- 
fied [hypostasirte]  po7vers,  vjhich  continue 
working  in  independent  activity ;  as,  for 
instance,  first,  the  intellectual  powers,  the 
Spirit,  (vov?,)  Reason,  {■\oyo(;^)  Thought, 
{(ppovncTii,)  Wisdom,  (aoipix,)  and  then 
Power,  (Jv»oti^ii,)  by  which  God  puts  the 
resolves  of  his  wisdom  into  execution ; 
and,  lastly,  the  moral  attributesj  without 
which  God's  almighty  power  never  shows 
itself  active  ;  namely,  holiness  or  moral 
perfection^  ((Jix«Kwt;»>),t  a  word  which 
must  be  understood  according  to  the  Hel- 
lenistic and  Hebrew  phraseology,  and  not 
in  the  narrow  sense  of  the  German  word, 
gerechtigkeit,  unless  people  will  under- 


•  The  Gnostics  also  pictured  the  happiness  of 
the  Trvwixa.TtKoi  received  into  the  Pleroma,  under 
the  image  of  a  marriage  festival,  a  marriage  be- 
tween the  (ra)T»5  and  the  3-o<|)/5t ;  between  the  spi- 
ritual natures  and  the  angels.  (Sec  l)clow.)  So  in 
Heracleon  ap.   Origen.  t.  x.  Joh.  §    14,  we  find 

\  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  iii.  28. 

33 


\  It  is  remarkable  that  Basilides  used  the  word 
SiKtu<,^vvn  according  to  its  Hebrew  and  Hellenistic 
sense,  to  denote  moral  perfection,  while  other 
Gnostics,  especially  those  of  the  second  class, 
used  it  only  to  denote  a  more  imperfect  moral  con- 
dition ;  an  idea  of  righteousness  (gcrechtigkeits- 
1  begrilT)  in  a  more  confined  sense. 
t2 


ABRAXAS. DUALISM. PROCESS    OF   PURIFICATION. 


258 


stand  this  German  word  in  its  original 
etymological  sense,)  and  then,  after  moral 
perfection,  follows  inward  tranquillity, 
peace  [il^nvr,^)  which,  as  Basilides  justly 
acknowledged,  can  only  be  there  where 
holiness  is ;  and  this  tranquillity  is  the 
characteristic  of  the  Divine  life  :  and  this 
forms  the  close  of  this  inward  Divine 
development  of  life.*  The  number  seven 
Avas  a  holy  number  to  Basilides,  as  well 
as  to  many  theosophists  of  these  times ; 
and  thus,  in  his  system,  these  seven 
^vvd^n^,  together  with  the  first  original, 
which  had  unfolded  himself  into  them, 
formed  the  v^uTn  oySoocq,  and  the  root  of ! 
all  existence.  From  thence  the  spiritual  j 
life  went  on  developing  itself,  constantly 
farther  and  farther  into  manifold  degrees 
of  existence,  every  lower  one  being  always 
the  impression,  the  resembling  image  (civ- 
TtTi^TTo?)  of  the  higher.  If  we  may  draw 
conclusions  as  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
original  school  from  what  we  find  of  the 
later  Basilidians  in  Irenaeus,  and  from  the 
gems  and  amulets  of  the  Basilidians,  as 
Basilides,  in  accordance  witli  the  seven 
days  of  the  week,  always  supposed  seven 
similar  beings  in  every  stage  of  the  spi- 
ritual world, — so  also,  in  consideration  of 
the  days  of  the  year,  he  supposed  there 
were  three  hundred  and  sixty-tive  such 
regions,  or  stages,  in  the  spiritual  world. 
This  is  expressed  in  the  mystical  word : 
a^ga|a?  (which  was  a  symbol  of  his  sect) 
when  it  is  interpreted  by  the  usual  method 
of  reckoning  Greek  letters  numerically.! 

Within  this  emanalion-ianrld  everything 
was  tliat  which  it  ought  to  be  in  its  own 
proper  position  :  but  out  of  an  union  be- 
tween the  Divine  and  the  undivine  there 
arose  a  disharmony,  which  was  to  be 
brought  again  into  harmony. 

There  is,  alas  !  in  this  place,  an  hiatus 
in  our  accounts  of  the  Basilidian  system. 
It  is  a  matter  of  question  whether  Basilides 
followed  the  mode  of  conception  in  use 
with  those  who  supposed  the  intermixture 
to  take  place  by  the  falling  down  of  some 
of  the  Divine  sead  of  life  into  the  chaos 
bordering  upon  it;  or  of  those,  who  ima- 
gined an  empire  of  evil,  which  was  active 

*  Iren.  lib.  i.  c.  24,  lib.  ii.  c.  16.  Clem.  Stiom. 
lib.  iv.  5,39. 

-j-  [*  _1  4-  y2_  2  +  p  =100  +  *  .-=1  +  I  = 
60  +  *=1  -I-  c  =  200'.— H.  J.  R.] 

It  may  be  that  this  name,  which  desitmatcs  the 
whole  emanation-world  as  development  of  the  .Su- 
preme Being,  had  also  another  meaning;  but  all 
attempts  at  an  explanation  of  it  will  forever  be 
merely  arbitrary  ones,  for  there  are  no  sure  grounds 
in  existence  from  which  one  could  argue  about  it. 


by  its  own  energy,  and  supposed  the 
intermixture  to  have  taken  place  bv  an 
aggressive  assault  of  this  empire  upon  the 
Empire  of  Light.  In  a  fragment*  which 
is  still  extant,  Basilides  quotes  the  opinion 
of  the  Persians  on  the  two  opposite  em- 
pires of  Ormuzd  and  Ahriman ;  but  as 
the  passage  which  follows  has  not  been 
preserved  to  us,  we  cannot  with  certainty 
conclude  whether  he  quoted  this  doctrine 
in  approbation  or  disapprobation.  If  we 
remember  that  he  belonged  to  those  who 
wished  to  complete  the  propositions  of 
the  Grecian,  that  is,  the  Platonic  philo- 
sophy, by  means  of  the  profounder  wis- 
dom of  the  East,  the  first  of  these  suppo- 
sitions will  appear  the  most  probable. 
Also,  when  he  spoke  of  a  confusion  and 
intermixture  of  principles,!  this  might 
very  naturally  lead  to  such  a  conclusion. 
The  accusation  made  by  Clemens  of 
Alexandria  against  Basilides,  that  he  deified 
the  devil,!  leads  also  to  the  supposition 
that  Basilides  gave  occasion  to  this  accu- 
sation by  his  representation  of  a  substan- 
tial evil  Being.§  And,  besides,  the  Basi- 
lidian doctrines  have  much  that  is  akin  to 
the  Parsic  and  Manichaean.|| 

But  howsoever  this  intermixture  of 
Light  and  Darkness,  of  the  Divine  and 
the  undivine,  might  have  arisen,  it  would 
nevertheless,  according  to  this  system, 
necessarily  be  subservient  to  the  glorifi- 
cation of  the  Divine  Being,  to  the  fulfill- 
ing of  the  ideas  of  the  Supreme' Wisdom, 
and  of  the  law  of  all  the  development  of 
life  ;  because  the  empire  of  evil  is  of  itself 
naturally  nothing  worth.  The  empire  of 
the  Divine  Being  is  the  real  empire,  and 
that  which  is  naturally  victorious. 

Lights  Life,  Soul,  Good  ;  on  one 
side  : — Darkness,  Death,  Matter,  Evil, 
on  the  other — these  in  the  system  of 
Basilides,  were  the  members  which  an- 
swered to  each  other,  and  maintained  the 
opposition  which  he   supposed  to  exist 

*  Disputat.  Archel.  et  Mani.  opp.  Hippolyt  ed. 
Fabricii.  lib.  iii.  p.  193. 

!  TOffi^o;  Kcu  <ruy^ui7l(  ifX'^"'  C!lem.  1.  ii.  f. 
408. 

\   Clemens  Strom,  lib.  iv.  p.  507.  7n»f  cuk  ^Skc, 

§  Ai-j^ji-.Koc,  Ahriman. 

!|  If  Basilides,  1.  c.  in  the  Dissertation  of  Arche- 
laus,  speaks  in  his  own  person  of  a  pauperis  na- 
tura,  sine  radice  et  sine  loco  rebus  superveniens, 
must  not  these  enigmatic  words  be  taken  to  express 
the  doctrine-  of  an  ein[)ire  of  evil,  witiiout  begin- 
ning, which,  in  its  poverty,  is  smitten  with  desire 
after  the  treasures  of  the  kingdom  of  Light;  and 
penetrating  into  the  light,  would  wish  to  seize 
these,  and  carry  them  off  for  itself. 


METEMPSYCHOSIS DEVELOPMENT    OF    LIEE. 


259 


throughout  the  whole  course  of  the  uni- 
rerse.  In  general,  just  as  rust  fastens 
itself  from  without  on  iron,  so  Darkness 
and  Death  cleave  to  the  fallen  seed  of 
Light,  and  Life^  Evil  cleaves  to  Good, 
and  the  imdivine  to  the  Divine,  without, 
however,  effecting  the  annihilation  of  the 
original  Being;  it  must  only  by  degrees 
purify  itself  from  every  thing  foreign 
to  it,  in  order  to  attain  to  its  original 
splendour,  just  as  iron  must  be  cleansed 
from  rust  in  order  to  obtain  again  a 
higher  polish.*  Such  a  process  of  puri- 
fication the  whole  course  of  this  ivorld 
affords  to  the  fallen  being,  as  a  system 
which  was  formed  for  the  perfection 
of  this  purification,  in  order  to  sepa- 
rate that  which  is  Divine  from  that  which 
is  foreign  to  its  nature,  and  to  conduct  it 
again  to  what  is  akin  to  it,  and  to  a  re- 
imion  with  its  original  source. 

One  would  be  inclined  to  think  that  a 
system  in  which  a  moral  retribution  was 
the  prevailing  idea,  might,  perhaps,  admit 
the  notion  of  a  passage  of  the  soul  into 
various  human  bodies,  according  to  the 
measure  of  its  deserts  in  a  former  state  of 
existence,  so  that  it  might  be  placed,  ac- 
cording to  its  deserts,  in  a  different  hu- 
man body,  and  in  different  circumstances, 
and  a  different  situation,  and  so  that  it  might 
have  to  expiate  by  penitence  ihe  guilt  con- 
tracted in  its  former  state,  although  only 
conscious  of  it  in  a  mysterious  and  gen- 
eral manner.  But  the  doctrine  of  a  ban- 
ishment of  the  soul  into  the  bodies  of 
animals  does  not  appear  to  suit  so  well 
the  prevailing  moral  notion  of  the  system, 
as  one  cannot  imagine  any  penitence 
taking  place  where  there  is  no  moral 
consciousness  at  all.  And  yet,  in  all  sys- 
tems of  this  nature,  the  moral  element  is 
not  purely  and  abstractedly  conceived, 
but  is  always  mixed  with  physical  con- 
siderations. We  have,  therefore,  no  reason 
to  doubt  an  account  which  makes  Basi- 
lides  introduce  such  a  metempsychosis  in 
his  own  words  ;  as  it  is  a  doctrine  which, 
by  means  of  the  intermixture  of  Ori- 
entalism, Platonism,  and  Jndaism,  was 
cert;iinly  at  that  time  widely  diffused  even 
among  many  Jewish  sects. 

Two  modes,  however,  of  viewing  this 
doctrine  may  now  be  thought  of;  the 
one,  when  the  notion  of  moral  retribution 


j  is  constantly  kept  steadfastly  in  view,  and 
\  the  soul  is  supposed  to  be  banished  into 
I  the  bodies  of  animals,  only  as  a  mode  of 
\punishment  :  the  other,  when  it  is  con- 
I  ceived  under  the  more  physical  notion  of 
ja  gradual  development  of  the  spiritual 
j  seed  of  life,  which  constantly  becomes 
I  more  freed  from  matter,  which  keej)s  it 
prisoner,  and  constantly  attains  more  and 
more  to  consciousness,  and  to  the  deve- 
I  lopment  of  its  original  nature.  Basilides 
j  appears  in  one  passage  to  favour  this 
latter  notion,  and  appears  to  be  declaring 
how  the  soul  struggles  itself  into  con- 
sciousness, in  the  body  of  an  animal  out 
i  of  an  unconscious  state.  The  words  in 
Rom.  vii.  9,  about  a  life  without  the  law, 
he  understands  as  relating  to  such  a  life 
in  the  body  of  an  animal,  whether  that 
of  a  quadruped,  or  that  of  a  bird  ;  where 
no  law  for  the  soul  could  exist.*  The 
view,  that  the  soul  might  be  still  more 
imprisoned  and  hemmed  in  by  matter,  in 
yet  lower  degrees  of  existence,  would 
easily  engraft  itself  on  this  interpretation ; 
and  also  that  in  plants,  and  in  stones,  there 
I  is  a  soul,  only  more  imprisoned,  wliich, 
[  by  degrees,  freeing  itself  more  and  more, 
developes  itself  from  stone  to  plant,  from 
!  plant  to  animal,  and  from  animal  to  man. 
iThis  mode  of  representation  suits  also 
:  with  his  whole  system  ;  because  he  con- 
!  siders  matter  not  as  any  thing  that  lives, 
but  oidy  as  that  dead  stuff,  which  has 
joined  itself  with  that  which  is  living. 
And  beside,  there  is  with  him  no  such 
thing  as  a  dead  nature  ;  but  in  all  nature 
there  is  a  life  which  is  held  prisoner 
by  matter,  and  striving  to  set  itself  free. 
And  thus  he  might  well  say,  that  all  ex- 
istence is  connected  together  one  part 
with  the  other;  and  that,  according  to 
the  will  of  God,  man  must  love  all  that 
exists,  in  virtue  of  this  mutual  connection.-j- 
Two  different  views  were  here  also 
united  together:  the  one  was,  a  gradual 
development  from  the  lowest  to  the  high- 
est, from  M'hich  that  original  intermixture 
and  that  original  fall  had  proceeded;  and 
the  other,  a  voluntarily-incurred  degrada- 
tion into  a  lower  state  of  being.  And 
yet,  one  is  inclined  to  ask,  whether  Ba- 
silides really  supposed  that  the  being  of 
light  (lichtnatur)  or  soul,  which  had  once 
I  attained  to  humanity,  in  the  process  of  its 


•  Basilides  speaks  thus  in  general  terms  about 
the  sufferings  of  all  fallen  Beings  of  Light ; 
"Trouble  and  anxiety  naturally  fall  on  things,  as 
rust  on  iron."     'O  xovic  ift  o  <;)c/?of  irfju/u0ouv(t  tkc 


?rgxyuu<ri¥  itr  i  l:;  Tct  (n<fiiga  Clciliens  Alex.  Strom.    t,;re;wi  <fifjii»  T6  iyLTTf)!.!! 
lib.  iv.  p.  609.  a.  I  (^(.uii  ■rfi(  to  toui  uTra-tTa, 


*    See   Origcn   Commentar.   in  Ep.  ad  Rom. 
vol.  iv.  0pp.  p.  549. 


Strom,  lib.  iv.  fol.  508. 


260  PROVIDENCE WISDOM    OF    THE    PATRIARCHS. 

purification  and  development,  could  ever  the  temple  of  God."  (See  below.)  It 
sink  back  into  the  body  of  an  animal;  or  |  was  a  great  object  to  him  to  justify  Pro- 
whetherhe  did  not,  on  the  contrary,  con-  i  vidence  against  every  reproach.  His  con- 
tine  the  process  of  purification  for  a  na- 
ture which  liad  once  attained  to  this 
point,  entirely  within  the  limits  of  human 
nature. 

To  the  whole  earthly  system,  or  to 
this  whole  purifying  process  of  nature 
and  history,  Basilides  assigned  such  a 
Creator  (of  whose  place  in  the  Gnostic 
systems  we  have  already  spoken  in  the 
introductory  remarks,)  as  he  called  by 
the  name  of  the  Ruler,  or  the  angel  that 
has  the  government  of  this  world,  (5ci§- 
;^w^,)  and  yet,  according  to  the  doctrine 
of  Basilides,  this  Archon  does  not  act  in- 
dependently and  by  his  own  power  in  the 
conducting  of  the  universe;  all  at  last  pro- 
ceeds from  the  providenceof  the  Supreme 
God,  which  presides  over  every  thing. 

In  the  first  place,  all  beings  develope 
themselves  according  to  the  law  implanted 
in  their  peculiar  individual  natures  ;  whicl 


elusion  always  was,  "■  J  will  rather  say 
any  thing  whatever,  than  cast  the  slightest 
imputation  on  Providence."* 

With  regard  to  the  relation  of  Judaism 
to  the  revelation  of  the  loftiest  truth  and 
to  Christianity,  it  is  in  the  highest  degree 
probable  that  Basilides  thought  in  a  man- 
ner analogous  to  the  Alexandrian  Jewish 
notions  on  this  point,  and  to  his  own  no- 
tions as  to  the  relation  between  the  earthly 
world  and  the  loftiest  system  of  the  uni- 
verse. He  supposed  that  the  Archon,  in 
the  conduct  of  the  Jewish  people,  as  well 
as  in  the  conduct  of  the  universe,  had 
served  the  Supreme  God  as  an  instrument, 
which  was  not  itself  conscious  of  the 
ideas  which  were  implanted  in  it,  and  that 
the  Archon  had  been  taken  by  the  great 
mass  of  the  Jewish  people  for  the  Supreme 
God  himself,  whom  he  was  to  represent. 
It  was  only  those  higher  natures,  which 
law,  together  with  their  nature,  proceeds  I  were  to  be  found  dispersed  among  the 
from  the  Supreme  God.  The  Archon  only  j  Jewish  people  ;  it  was  only  the  "■  people 
gives  the  first  impulse  to  this  natural  of  God,"  in  its  true  sense ;  the  irvtvjjLX'n- 
course  of  development,  and  then  he  him-  ko?  'ic^u-nX,  that  had  been  able  to  raise 
self  becomes  guided  in  his  whole  conduct  themselves  above  the  Archon  himself,  to 
by  the  ideas  of  the  Supreme  God,  who  a  recognition  of  the  Supreme  God  repre- 
animates  every  thing,  without  being  able  j  sented  by  him,  and  thus,  above  the  sen- 


to  comprehend  them.*  We  c*nnot,  there- 
fore, in  any  way  accuse  Basilides  of  an 
unchristian  contempt  of  the  world,  a 
denial  of  a  revelation  of  God  in  the  uni- 
verse, or  an  unchristian  dualism,  which 
does  not  recognise  the  God  of  grace  as 
the  God  of  creation,  and  which  tears 
asunder  the  harmonious  connection  be- 
tween revelation  and  nature  ;  such  a  vio- 
lent dualism  can  by  no  means  be  laid  to 
his  charge.  It  was  rather  that  he  made 
it  a  matter  of  great  consequence  to  set 
forth  the  law  of  unity  which  bound  every 
thing  together,  from  the  highest  to  the 
lowest ;  "  the  world  is  only  one,  and  is 


•  Clem.  Strom,  lib.  iv.  p.  509.  'H  Trcovcia,  u 
X2i/  iXTTo  rcu  d^^ovTct  nivittrBai  if^naj,  dx?C  iyic<i<Ti<7-- 
?rx(h  Toi;  cuiriajc  avv  km  tm  tciiv  o^a'V  yvur'u  TTfoi  tou 
Tut  ihuv  Qku.  Thus,  also,  in  Plotinus  (Ennciul. 
iii.  lib.  ii.,)  on  the  subject  of  vrptvciet  as  a  natural 
development  in  virtue  of  an  indwelling  eternal 
law  of  reason,  we  find  the  following  remark:  t«v 
TTfcvimv  Tat  ■ra.vTt  iivti,  to  xtTM.  Viuv  auro  Hint.  There 
is,  however,  this  difl'erence,  that  in  Basilides  there 
is  a  more  Christian  consideration  brought  forward  ; 
because  he  supposes,  in  co-operation  with  the  law 
of  nature,  a  personal  God,  who  acts  independently, 
and  guides  the  development  of  that  law  of  nature  ; 
and,  by  means  of  the  act  of  redemj)tion,  brings 
to  perfection  higher  results,  than  could  proceed 


suous  covering  of  Judaism  to  the  con- 
templation of  those  ideas,  which  were 
contained  under  this  covering,  but  not 
understood  by  the  Archon  himself.  An 
example  of  his  allegorical  notions  is 
found  in  the  following  saying,  "  The  one 
temple  of  Jerusalem  is  the  type  of  the 
one  world,  which  is  the  temple  of  God."t 
But  he  supposed  also  the  existence  of 
written  documents,  in  which  the  liigher 
wisdom  was  brought  forward,  perhaps 
more  unreservedly  than  in  the  writings  of 
the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament.  h\  ac- 
cordance with  an  idea  then  widely  spread, 
I  he  traced  the  tradition  of  such  a  philo- 
sophical secret  doctrine  up  to  the  Patri- 
archs in  particular ;  and  it  would  appear 
to  him  hardly  any  thing  else  than  natural, 
that  the  great  mass  of  the  sensuous- 
minded  Jews  should  not  receive  those 
writings,  of  which  they  could  understand 


•   Clem.  Strom,  lib.  iv.  p.  506.  c.  nai'T*  ifo  jag 

fASlXKOV,  )»  XOXiV  TO  TrgiVOit/V  i^ce. 

•j-  Clem.  Strom,  lib.  v.  p.  583.  D.  'Ev*  vmv 
lifuT-jfAVio;  Tov  &iou  (o  Md'crxc)  fAovoywi  Tt  Koa-fA(.v 
KiLTny-yfiKi.  Similarly  also,  Philo  says,  ysg/ ^5v«g;^/«c. 
lib.  ii.,  TO  fj(iv   uvceTUTce  xa;  tt^oc  <iX>iSv3.v   li^oy   ©mo 


tO/Uli^ilV  TOV  a-U/ATr^LVTO.    ^»    K'jO-/U0V    llVil,  ' 


Xis^o. 


/unToy.     'I'his  idea  is  still  farther  carried  into  par- 
from  the  mere  development  of  the  law  of  nature,  I  ticulars  both  by  Philo  and  Josephus. 


DOCTRINE    OP   REDEMPTION. — CHRISTOLOGY. 


nothing,  as  canonical.  According  to  the 
Alexandrian  fashion,  he  deduced  all  the 
traces  of  truth  found  in  the  best  Greek 
philosophers,*  Which  he  eagerly  hunted , 
after,  from  that  original  tradition.  ''  Let 
no  one  believe,"  says  Isidorus,  the  son 
of  Basilides,  *'  that  that  which  we  call  a 
peculiar  possession  of  the  elect,  was  ear- 
lier said  by  some  philosophers ;  for  it  is 
not  their  discovery,  but  they  have  taken 
it  out  of  the  Prophets,  and  attributed  it  to 
their  pretended  sages  (or  to  their  false : 
wisdom.")!  It  certainly  deserves  to  be  j 
remarked  (as  Gieseler  has  remarked,)  that  | 
Basilides  supposed  even  Ham  to  have 
been  among  those  who  handed  down  this 
liigher  wisdom,  and  perhaps,  he  deduced 
peculiarly  from  him  the  (pt^oc-of »«  Ba.^Bot- 
foj,J  which  he  probably,  as  a  recogniser 
of  the  higher  wisdom,  set  above  the 
Greeks.§ 

The  fundamental  Christian  doctrine  of 
a  redeeming  grace  had  its  essential  place 
in  the  system  of  Basilides,  as  the  Supreme 
God  was  to  manifest  himself  to  human 
nature,  and  communicate  to  it  a  life  akin 
to  his  own,  in  order  to  raise  it  above  the 
limits  of  the  mundane  system,  or  the 
world  of  the  archon,  to  communion  with 
himself,  and  to  the  higher  world  of  spirits. 
It  is  clear  that  this  operation  of  the  Su- 
preme God,  according  to  the  system  of 
Basilides,  could  only  relate  to  those  spi- 
ritual natures  which  were  destined  by 
their  very  constitution  for  a  higher  world, 
but  which  found  themselves  prisoners  in 
a  lower  one.  These  might,  through  the 
progressive  development  of  the  metem- 
psychosis raise  themselves  from  one  stage 
to  another  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Archon  ; 
but  they  could  not,  in  compliance  with 
the  desire  implanted  in  them,  attain  beyond 
this  kingdom  and  the  Archon  himself,  to 
communion  with  the  highest  system  of 
the  world,  and  to  clear  knowledge,  as  well 
as  to  the  free  exercise  of  their  higher  na- 
ture, unless  the  Supreme  God  himself 
brought  his  Divine  life  near  to  their  kin- 
dred seed  of  life,  and  thereby  first  set  this 

•   As  with  Plato  and  Aristotle. 

■j-  Clem.  Strom,  vi.  641.      KiU  ^ji  t/c  oiVSm,  i 

■XW   x/rr'j  rivani  <p<A.C(r;cci)V,  oii   yij>  sstt/v  adnctv   iCpn/uoi, 

vrr^ifXj.v'rt  kxt  adircu;  a-!.<pa.  It  appears  to  me  now, 
that  this  passage  requires  no  emendation,  if  we 
may  take  the  word  o-o^pa  cither  as  masculine  or 
neuter.  The  expression  that  follows,  d  Trfonrot- 
cufAivu  <p;hca-'.<fi^\/,  confirms  this  explanation  of  it. 

^  The  traces  of  the  higher  wisdom,  to  be  found 
among  the  Persians  and  Hindoos. 


261 

into  activity.  And  while  spiritual  natures, 
by  the  act  of  redemption,  are  raised  to 
tlie  highest  position,  the  influence  of  re- 
demption at  the  same  time  extends  itself 
also  to  the  subordinate  stages  of  being; 
harmony  becomes  universally  re-esta- 
blished, and  every  class  of  being  attains 
the  condition  which  is  conformable  to  its 
nature.  But  although  Basilides  on  the 
one  side  brought  forward  an  element  in 
the  doctrine  of  redemption,  which  was 
entirely  foreign  to  the  fleshly  Judaism  that 
clung  to  eartli, — he  was  on  the  otlier  side, 
like  Cerinthus,  altogether  Ebmiitish^  inas- 
much as  he  supposed  a  sudden  entrance 
of  the  Divine  nature  into  the  life  of  Jesus, 
and  did  not  recognise  any  God-man,  in 
whom  the  Divine  and  the  human  natures 
had  been  inseparably  united  from  the  first. 
He  supposed,  as  his  fundamental  position, 
a  redeeming  God,  but  no  redeeming  God- 
man. 

The  man  Jesus  was  not  to  him  the 
Redeemer,  he  was  distinguished  from 
other  men  only  in  degree ;  and  Basilides 
does  not  appear  ever  to  have  ascribed 
absolute  unsinfulness  to  him.  He  was,  in 
the  notions  of  Basilides,  only  the  instru- 
ment w^hich  the  redeeming  God  chose,  in 
order  to  reveal  himself  in  human  nature, 
and  to  seize  on  that  nature  so  as  to  work 
upon  it.  With  him  the  Redeemer,  in  the 
peculiar  and  highest  sense  of  the  word,  was 
the  highest  iEon,*  who  was  sent  down 
from  the  Supreme  God  for  the  fulfilment  of 
the  work  of  redemption;  this  Being  united 
himself  with  the  man  Jesus  at  his  baptism 
in  the  Jordan.  From  this  point  the  whole 
work  of  redemption  set  forth :  from  that 
time  the  man  Jesus  spoke  things  w'hich 
were  far  beyond  the  reach  of  this  lower 
creation. 

The  Archon  himself,  as  well  as  John 
the  Baptist  (who  was,  in  the  name  of  the 
Archon,  to  consecrate  Jesus  to  the  office 
of  Messiah,  in  the  subordinate  sense  in 
which  the  Archon  wished,  and  had  pro- 
mised a  IMessiah,)  was  surprised,  and 
seized  with  astonishment,  when  he  saw 
the  Not/?  descend,  and  when  he  heard  at 
the  same  time  the  voice  that  sounded  from 
heaven,  and  perceived  the  accompanying 
appearances,!  and  heard  this  Jesus,  whom 
he  had  supposed  a  man  of  his  own  king- 
dom, announce  such  extraordinary  things. 
He  now  himself,  for  the  first  time,  recog- 


"  Or  VM(,  which  is  called  cfisowvoc,  as  serving  to 
the  salvation  of  mankind. 

!  Which  Basilides  apparently  learned  from  an 
apocryphal  GospeL 


262 

nises  the  Supreme  God,  and  the  higiiest 
system  of  the  world,  to  both  of  which 
he  had  mvoluntarily  served,  till  now,  as 
an  unconscious  instrument,  which  be- 
lieved that  it  acted  iudependently.  He 
now  submits  himself  willingly  to  a  higher 
Power,  imploring  it  with  astonishment; 
and  from  this  moment  he  works  freely 
and  consciously,  as  the  instrument  of 
that  higher  Power.  He  now  recognises 
the  truth,  that  even  in  the  kingdom  in 
which  he  had  hitherto  believed  himself  to 
be  supreme,  there  are  beings  imprisoned, 
which  are  elevated  above  himself  and  his 
world,  and  which  the  Not;?  will  free  from 
these  bounds,  as  well  as  the  man  Jesus, 
and  raise  them  to  the  higher  system  of 
the  world ;  he  recognises  the  essential 
distinction  between  the  natures  that  be- 
long to  him  of  right  and  are  akin  to  him,* 
and  those  which,  by  their  kind,  belong  to 
a  higher  kingdom,  and  are  capable  of 
communion  with  the  Not;; ;  he  separates 
each  from  the  other,  and  lets  the  latter  go 
free  out  of  his  kingdom,  without  putting 
any  impediment  in  the  way  of  their  ele- 
vation. We  shall  now  quote  the  very 
words  of  this  man,  who  conceived  every 
tiling  under  his  own  peculiar  imagery  : 
"When  the  ruler  of  the  world  heard  the 
words  of  the  Redeeming  Spirit,!  he  be- 
came astonished  at  that  which  he  heard 
and  saw,  as  he  heard  unexpectedly  the 
glorious  message ;  and  his  astonishment 
was  called  fear."  The  words, "The  fear 
of  God  is  the  beginning  of  wisdom,"  are 
thus  to  be  understood ;  they  mean  that 
the  fear  of  t/ns  God  is  the  beginning  of 
wisdom,  which  separates  the  different 
kinds  of  beings  from  one  another,  allows 
them  to  come  to  perfection,  and  leads 
them  all  to  the  stage  of  existence  for 
which  they  are  destined;  for  he  that 
rules  over  all  does  not  separate  merely 
tliose  which  belong  to  the  world,  but 
even  the  elect,  and  suffers  them  to  depart 
freely  from  his  dominion.J 

*   The  K^fjio;, — the  ktio-k, — the  Kt>r/uiKOi, — the 

•j-  Also  in  the  Eittyyo^nv  xaS"  'Efi^nou;,  which 
Jerome  had  received  from  the  Nazarenes,  the 
words  which  sounded  from  heaven,  are  ascribed  to 
the  "fons  omnis  Spiritus  Sancti,  qui  requievit 
super  Christum,"  who  descended  from  heaven. 

ir  Clemens,  Stromat.  lib.  ii.  p.  375,  ti»  ' A^-^ovthl 

'i>L7rK:tyi'y!U  Tai  ts   vM.aicr fx-xTi  km  tm  fiiJf/.u.Tt  icxi  thv 

^Uk'.K^lV>}T:Klli  TS  *3U  itm^nlKK  X.M  TS\SaT«))C  KH  ^TT'j- 
KJ.TX(7r:i7tK>i;,   oil    ytp    JUOVOV  TOV    KCCTfAlJV,  u\K!l  x.at  T«V 

lukoyhv  (fwKg/v«,  0  iTi  TTdirt  Tr^oTrijuTru-  Wc  must 
here  add  a  few  remarks.     The  explanation  of  the 


THE    ARCHON    UNDECEIVED. 


We  see  here  how  Basilides  conceived 
and  painted  after  his  own  eccentric  man- 
ner, that  which  Christianity  effects,  as  a 
divinely  animating,  freeing  and  enlighten- 
ing principle,  as  the  matter  which  sets 
human  nature  in  fermentation.  These 
effects,  partly  judging  by  the  deep  pene- 
tration of  his  own  mind,  and  applying  its 
inward  operations  to  outward  things,  he 
traced  to  some  fundamental  law  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  partly  from  observation  of 
the  phenomena  of  his  own  time.  That 
which  Christianity  effected  generally,  in 
reference  to  the  history  of  human  nature, 
Basilides  represented  as  an  impression 
made  on  the  Archon  which  represented 
that  nature. 

Like  Cerinthus,  he  also  attributed  the 
whole  work  of  redemption  to  the  redeem- 
ing heavenly  Genius,  and  most  probably 
coincided  with  him  in  the  supposition 
that  this  Genius  had  left  the  man,  whom 
he  had  hitherto  made  use  of  as  his  in- 
strument, to  himself  at  the  time  of  his 
suffering.  According  to  his  system,  the 
suffering  of  Christ  could  have  nothing  to 
do  with  the  work  of  redemption  ;  for,  ac- 
cording to  his  narrow  views  of  justice,  it 
was  not  consonant  to  the  Divine  justice 
that  one,  who  deserved  it  not,  should 
suffer  for  others ;  and  it  was  required, 
that  all  evil  should  be  atoned  for  by  suf- 
fering. He  considered  not  merely  suffer- 
ing in  general,  but  also  every  suffering  in 
particular,  as  a  punishment  for  sin.     He 


words  of  Ps.  cxi.  10,  or  of  Eccles.  i.  16,  according 
to  the  Basilidian  system,  gives  a  remarkable  ex- 
ample of  the  caprice  of  a  theosophical  exegesis, 
which,  without  regard  to  the  context  in  which  the 
words  stand,  lets  them,  according  to  this  system, 
mean  any  thing  which  they  can  possibly  mean  in 
any  context  whatever.  If  the  announcement  of 
the  heavenly  itumvo;  is  called  an  ilaL-^yixtcv  for  the 
d^X^'v,  then  it  is  clear  (they  conclude,)  that  he  did 
not  merely  submit  himself  by  compulsion  to  the 
higher  powers,  but  that  his  first  astonishment 
passed  into  a  mingled  feeling  of  delight  and  reve- 
I  rence.  The  prospect,  as  soon  as  the  elect  natures 
j  should  have  attained  tiie  glory  destined  for  them, 
I  of  becoming  freed  from  the  tiresome  regimen  of 
this  world,  and  of  entering  into  rest  with  his  own 
'  people,  (to  which  expectation  of  the  Demiurgos 
j  the  Gnostics  referred,  Rom.  viii.  20,  21,  according 
j  to  Origen,  t.  i.  in  Joh.  p.  24,)  must  assuredly  have 
been  a  joyful  one  for  him.  Comp.  Didascal. 
anatol.  opp.  Clem.  p.  79t>  D.,  where  the  fact  that 
the  Demiurgos  established  the  Sabbath,  is  adduced 
as  a  proof  how  disagreeable  labour  is  to  him.  Per- 
haps it  may  occur  to  some  persons,  that  we  ought 
to  read  rcn  iTti  Tra-ai  instead  of  o  6?r/  7ri.<n,  so  that  it 
would  mean  that  the  Archon  freely  leads  the  elect 
natures  out  of  his  kingdom  to  the  God  who  is 
above  all,  to  whom  it  is  their  last  destination  to 
elevate  themselves. 


THEODIC^A. NO    OBJECTIVE    JUSTTFICATION.  263 

held  the  theory  against  which  Christ  .with  that  heavenly  redeeming  Spirit  (the 
spoke  in  John  ix.  3.  Luke  xiii.  2.  Every  i  .Jiaxo»o?.)  hi  order  to  become  worthy  of 
one  suffers  for  his  actual  sins,  or  for  the  t  being  redeemed  before  all  others  who 
evil  present  in  his  nature, — evil  which  he  j  needed  redemption,  and  being  used  as  an 
bro'ight  with  him  out  of  a  former  state  of  instrument  to  extend  farther  the  opera- 
existence,  and  which,  nevertheless,  had  [  tions  of  the  redeeming  Spirit  to  others,  it 
not  yet  come  into  a  state  of  activity.*  i  was  suflicient  if  he,  as  the  most  excellent 
And  thus,  by  reference  to  evil  of  this  and  purest  man,  and  the  most  advanced 
kind,  he  justified  Providence  in  the  suf-|  in  the  process  of  purification,  had  merely 
ferings  inflicted  on  children.  If  any  one  the  minimum  of  sinfulness.  We  must 
made  an  objection  to  him  from  the  suffer-  '■  here  observe  that  the  Basilidian  system, 


iiigs  of  acknowledged  good  men,  he  had 
fair  right  to  answer  by  an  appeal  to  the 
general  fact  of  the  presence  of  sinfulness 


which  at  any  rate  supposed  a  proportion 
between  the  sin  and  the  degree  of  punish- 
ment, was  certainly  liable  to  the  follow- 


in  human  nature,  and  to  say, — "Be  the  ing  objection:  "How  does  so  great  suf- 
man  you  show  me  what  he  may,  he  is ;  fering  consist  with  the  smallest  degree  of 
still  a  man,  and  God  only  is  holy;  who  sinfulness  .?"  But,  apparently  he  was  not 
will  find  harmony  among  those,  where  at  a  loss  for  an  answer  here,  if  we  may 
there  is  no  harmony  ?"|  Job  xiv.  4.  |  judge  from  what  he  says  on  the  subject 
But  then  the  case  was  different,  where  of  martyrdom.  He  says,  "The  conscious- 
tliis  proposition  was  applied  to  the  Re-  j  ness  of  serving  as  an  instrument  for  the 
deomer,  who,  as  sure  as  he  is  the  Re-  i  highest  and  holiest  things  of  human  na- 
deeiner,  must  be  free  from  sin.  Clemens  ture,  and  of  suffering  in  this  office,  (per- 
of  Alexandria  expressly  blames  Basilides  haps  also,  a  prospect  of  the  glory  into 
because  he  went  so  far  in  the  extension  !  which  he  should  enter  by  means  of  his 


of  this  proposition.  But  in  those  icords 
of  his  which  Clemens  quotes,  this  is  not 
necessarily  implied ;  he  says  only, — 
"  But  if  you,  leaving  this  whole  inquiry 
on  one  side,  come  to  this,  that  you   put 


suffering,)  sweetened  his  sufferings  to  him 
so  much,  that  it  was  to  him  as  if  he  did 
not  suffer  at  all. 

According  to    the  same  principle,  he 
also  consistently  acknowledged  no  justi- 


me  into  a  difficulty  by  particular  persons,  \  fication  in  the  sense  indicated  by  St.  Paul, 
if  you  say,  for  instance, — '  Then  he  has  j  no  objective  justification  before  God  ;  no 
sinned  because  he  has  suffered.'  " — It  may  ]  forgiveness  of  sin  as  a  release  from  sin 
be  said  that  Basilides  here  speaks  only  of  and  the  punishment  of  sin.  According  to 
certain  persons  held  in  particular  reverence,  i  his  doctrine,  every  sin,  whether  before  or 
and  in  great  fame  for  holiness ;  and  that  I  after  faith  in  the  Redeemer,  or  baptism, 
Clemens  has  allowed  himself  to  draw  an  must  be  alike  atoned  for  by  suffering.  That 
inference.  But,  in  the  first  place,  the  re-;  is  a  necessary  law  of  the  system  of  the 
proach  which  Basilides  here  suffers  to  be:  world,  which  nothing  can  annul.  The 
made  against  his  proposition,  would  lose  only  exception  he  makes  is  in  the  case  of 
its  proper  force  and  signification,  if  it  were  sins  proceeding  from  ignorance,  or  invo- 
not  so  understood  ;  and  in  the  second,  j  luntary  sins  :*  but  it  is  a  pity  that  his  ex- 
the  extension  of  tliis  proposition  dins  far,    planation  of  this  very  indefinite  expres- 


altogether  coheres  also  with  his  theory 
of  the  relation  of  suffering  to  sin,  and 
with  his  theory  of  the  Divine  justice,  and 
of  the  process  of  purification,  to  which 


sion  has  not  been  preserved  to  us.  But 
if,  on  the  contrary,  under  the  term  justifi- 
cation (iJixanwo-Ki  Siy-ccKjo-vtrt,)  be  understood 
an  inward  subjective  making  just,  a  sanc- 


pvery  nature  belonging  to  the  kingdom  of  i  trfication  through  tlie  communication  of 
the  Archon  is  subject.     The  Jesus  which  !  Divine  life,  then   such  a  doctrine  would 
belonged    to   this   kingdom   required   re- 1  hold  a  very  necessary  place  in  the  sys- 
tem of  Basilides. 

Among  the  religious  and  moral  notions 
of  the  Basilidian  school,  there  is  much 
that  deserves  attention,  which  we  are  de- 
sirous of  bringing  forward  particularly. 

In  regard  to  the  idea  of  Faith,  the  Ba- 
silidian school  distinguished  itself  by  this: 


demption    even    himself,   and    could    be 
made  partaker  of  it  only  by  his  connection 

*  Sutferings, — the  penances  and  purifications 
of  aurtpTtu.,  or  u/x»c^;/T«:v. — *^tromat.  iv.  506. 
[Sylbui),',  p.  217.  Potter,  p.  600.  Klotz,  vol.  ii. 
p.  322.] 

f  [Germ.  "  Wcr  will  eine  Stimme  finden  bei 
denen,  da  keine  Stimme  ist  T"  The  Hebrew  of 
the  passage,  however,  is  different  from  this,  and 
exactly  agrees  with  our  English  translation. — H. 
J.  R.] 


*     M.0V3K    Tic     iji:.VTIt<     KM    KtT     iyVOti-t     i^llJ^H. 

Strom,  iv.  536.     [Sylb.  p.  229.     Potter,  p.  633-4. 
Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  362.] 


264 


DOCTRINES    ABOUT   FAITH. 


that  they  expressly  opposed  the  usual 
Jewish  and  Jewish-Christian  notion  of 
Faith,  as  another  kind  of  opus  opcratum, 
an  acknowledgment  of  certain  religious 
truths,  which  exists  as  something  indi- 
vidual in  the  soul  of  man,  and  operates  no 
farther  on  the  whole  inward  life,  a  mere 
outwardly  existing  traditional  belief,  which 
brings  forth  no  fruits  in  the  life  of  man — 
and  also  that  they,  with  a  deeper  penetra- 
tion into  the  spirit  of  St.  PauPs  doctrines, 
represented  Faith  as  an  inward  thing,  an 
entire  bent  of  the  inward  life,  an  entrance 
of  the  Spirit  into  a  higher  sphere,  and  a 
real  communion  with  that  higher  system. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  he  receded  from 
the  genuine  notion  of  St.  Paul,  because, 
like  all  Gnostics  (except  Marcion)  he  con- 
sidered religion  in  its  contemplative,  more 
than  in  its  practical,  character ;  and  also, 
in  his  notion  of  Faith,  made  the  contem- 
plative element  more  prominent  than  the 
practical.  With  him  Faith  is  a  certain 
kind  of  view,*  which  includes  in  itself  a 
certain  intellectual  appropriation  of  that 
which  is  beheld,  and  a  new  spiritual  life 
also  in  it.  On  the  contrary,  according  to 
the  genuine  Christian  idea  of  St.  Paul, 
Faith  is  a  practical  appropriation  of  Di- 
vine things,  by  a  devotion  of  the  will,  a 
practical  entrance  into  a  new  relation  with 
'  God,  given  by  a  peculiar  revelation  from 
him,  from  which  an  entirely  new  direction 
and  employment  of  the  inward  life  pro- 
ceeds. From  this  we  acknowledge,  as 
the  whole  spiritual  life  is  formed  anew  from 
this  foundation,  an  entirely  new  kind  of 
religious  view  must  develope  itself.  When, 
therefore,  Basilides  supposed  different 
degrees  in  this  view  [anschauung]  (in  re- 
spect of  purity,  clearness,  elevation  and 
depth,)  no  objection  could  lie  against  him 
on  that  account,  on  any  genuine  Christian 
grounds,  had  he  only  recognised  the  com- 
mon foundation  of  faith  in  all  Christians, 
and  deduced  every  thing  only  from  the 
different  degrees  in  which  the  influence 
of  that  faith  developed  itself  on  the 
spiritual  life.  But  he,  confounding  be- 
tween faith  and  sight,t  supposed,  instead 
of  one  and  the  same  life  in  a  Faith,  Avhich 
is  the  same  in  all  Christians,  different 
kinds  of  Faith,  according  to  the  dillerent 
sorts  of  natures.     That  is  to  say,  just  as 


men,  according  to  their  nature,  belonged 
to  a  higher  or  a  lower  grade  of  the 
spiritual  world,  so  also  they  were  capable 
of  a  higher  or  a  lower  kind  of  view. 
Those  higher  ideas  need  no  proof,  but 
they  prove  themselves  through  them- 
selves, to  those  higher  spiritual  natures 
which  are  akin  to  them,  and  which  be- 
come involuntarily  attracted  by  the  reve- 
lation of  the  higher  world,  which  is  their 
proper  home.  Therefore,  Basilides  says, 
"  The  faith  of  the  elect  finds  out  doctrines 
without  any  demonstration  by  means  of  a 
spiritual  comprehension"  (an  intellectual 
sight  5)*  and  in  this  sense  he  gives  this 
definition  of  faith  ;  "  an  assent  of  the  soul 
to  something  which  does  not  act  upon  the 
senses,  because  it  is  not  present."!  That 
is  to  say, — although  the  elect  live  in  this 
world  as  strangers,  nevertheless,  by  the 
influence  of  faith,  they  recognise,  as  real, 
those  things  of  the  higher  world  which 
beam  upon  them  from  afar.  And  hence 
he  supposes  the  degree  of  faith  to  which 
a  person  can  elevate  himself  as  a  stranger 
in  this  world,  to  correspond  to  that  grade 
of  the  spiritual  world  to  which  he  be- 
longs.J 

From  the  principles  of  Basilides,  his 
moral  doctrines  must  have  been  of  a  severe 
nature.  In  his  morality  the  ruling  princi- 
ple must  have  been  this^  that  man  should 
free  himself  from  that  foreign  admixture, 
which  having  attached  itself  to  his  original 
nature,  disturbs  and  controls  it,  and  that 
he  should  constantly  attain  more  and 
more  to  a  free  development  and  exercise 
of  that  original  nature.  According  to  this 
system,  man  is  a  little  world;  just  as, 
according  to  his  spirit,  he  may  be  akin  to 
the  different  natures  of  the  higher  spiritual 
world,  so  also,  in  accordance  with  his 
lower  nature,  he  bears  within  himself 
that  which  is  akin  to  the  different  grades 
and  natures  of  the  lower  earthly  world. 
He  has  within  himself  many  admixtures§ 
of  a  foreign  nature,  wherein  the  different 
qualities  of  the  world  of  animals,  of 
vegetables,  and  of  minerals,  are  reflected  : 


*  [Anschauiincf.  See  the  former  notes  on  this 
word,  and  the  Preface— H.  .1.  R.] 

j-  [Aiischaiiune;.  Between  faith  and  that 
faculty,  by  which  IJasilidcs  supposed  a  view,  an 
image  or  visible  representation,  to  be  present  to  the 
mind  of  the  believer.     See  Preface. — H,  J.  R.] 


*  Clem.  Strom,  ii.  .363,  i  ma-rK  tmc  sx^cjof  t« 
fjtt&nfjtUTtt  dvarroJfiKTax  iii^ttr)icu<r^  jcxTiAx^s'  vitiT/Jtu. 
[Sylb.  p.  156.  Potter,  p.  433-4.  Klotz,  vol.  ii. 
p."l28. 

I  Clem.  Strom,  ii.  371.  4"/^"^  ovyKUT'^Bitri: 
fr«oc  T/  Tuv  jun  Ktvcvvrm  ctla^nvtv,  Ji*  to  /um  o-u^uvm. 
[fevlb.  p.  159.  Potter,  p.  443.  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p. 
139.] 

i  Clem.  Strom,  ii.  363,  iria-T/f  xoj  'ntxcyn  oIkh-jl 

ii7rifx.C(Tiuii,v  It  K'tr/MKii  ma-TK. 

§  Appendages  of  matter,  5r/i6«-afTJi//aTa. 


GRACE    AND    FREEWILL. 


and   thence  come  the  desires,  passions,  [ 
and  affections  corresponding  to  these  (as,  [ 
for  example,  the  imitative  and  pranksome  I 
nature  of  the   ape,   the  murderous   pro- 1 
pensities  of  the  wolf,  the  hardness  of  the 
diamond ;)  and  the  collection  of  all  these  j 
influences  of  the  world  of  animals,  plants, 
and  minerals,  forms  the  blind  unreason-; 
able    soul,*  which    always  opposes    the  '■ 
operations  of  that  part  of  man's  nature  j 
which  IS  akin  to  God.     It  seemed  of  im- 
portance to  Isidorus,  the  son  of  Basilides, 
to  guard  this  doctrine  from  the  objection, 
or    the   misunderstanding,  which  would 
represent  it  as  endangering  moral  free- 
dom, and  holding  out  an  excuse  for  every 
wickedness,  as-  if  it  proceeded  from  the 
irresistible  influences  of  these  foreign  ad- 
mixtures.    He  appealed  to  the   superior 
power  of  the  Divine  nature :  "  Since  we 
have  so  much  vantage-ground  by  means 
of  our  reason,  we  must,  therefore,  appear  i 
as  conquerors  over  the  lower  creature  in  [ 
us."t     He  says  also,  "  Let  a  man  only 
desire  to  do  good,  and  he  will  attain  it."J 
It  is  already  to  be  deduced  from  the  whole 
connection  of  the  Basilidian  scheme,  that 
while  he  placed  the  power  of  the  will  so  j 
higb,  yet  he  by  no  means  ascribed  to  it  { 
an  independent  self-sufficiency,  nor  at  all  : 
denied  the  necessity  of  the  assistance  of 
grace  from  a  higher  power.     According 
to  his  theory  of  redemption,  he  acknow- 
ledged it  as  necessary  that  the  Divine  in 
man  should  receive  power  from  its  con-  j 
nection  with  a  higher  source  in  order  to  j 
give  it  a  just  activity.   How  far  men  were  j 
admonished  by  him  of  their  need  of  help,  \ 
is  shown  by  the  advice  which    Isidorus  i 
gives    to   him    who   is^    suffering    under ! 
temptations:  "Let  him  only,"  he 'says, ! 
•'  not  withdraw  himself  from  the  brethren;  ; 
let  him  only  confide  in  his  communion  { 
with  the  body  of  saints;  let  him  saVi  '  I 
am   entered  into  the   sanctuary,  nothing 
evil   can   happen   to    me.'  "§     It  is  also  | 
proved  by  the  distinction  which  he  made,  ; 
of  the  two  conditions  of  the  inward  life, 
the    one,  where    a   man    in    temptations 
prays   for  strength  to   conquer,  and  the  ' 
other,  where  he  gives  thanks  for  the  vie- ' 
lory,  which  he  has  obtained  by  the  sup-  j 


•  The  4%"  w^i^-owc  a>,cyc(.  I 

■j"   Att    Si    Toi    X'.yi^'rtKw  KgiiTTiv^c    y&zfxtycu;.,  ruf 

i  Strom,  iii.  427,  dsKuroLrai  ju'^voy  oLTrnfrtraj  to 
xi>.:v  KM  'trriTw^mi.  [S3  lb.  p.  183.  Potter,  p.  510. 
Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  213.] 

§  Strom,  iii.  427.  [See  the  last  note  for 
references.] 

34 


265 

port  of  the  Divine  power.*  I  grant  that 
the  doctrine  of  certain  higher  natures, 
which  are  elevated  above  the  weaknesses 
of  other  men,  migiit  always  easily  create 
dangerous  self-deceits  of  pride,  because  it 
is  irreconcilable  with  the  existence  of 
Christian  humility.  There  were  later 
Basilidians,  who  corrupted  this  doctrine 
in  a  most  pernicious  manner,  and  thence 
deduced  the  freedom  of  the  saints,  which 
was  to  be  bound  by  no  law.l  (See  below.) 
The  doctrine  of  matter  might  have  led  to 
an  exaggerated  and  partial  ascetic  ten- 
dency in  morality:  but  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  the  communication  and  the  inter- 
lacing which  exists  between  the  visible 
and  the  invisible  world,  as  well  as  the 
recognition  of  the  Divine  nature  as  a 
victorious  forming-principle  for  all  crea- 
tion, had  here  a  counter-balancing  effect, 
as  we  have  already  observed  in  regard  to 
this  whole  class  of  Gnostics.  Basilides 
considers  marriage  as  a  holy  state,  in  no 
way  inconsistent  with  tlie  existence  of 
Christian  perfection;  and,  under  certain 
circumstances,  as  a  means  of  guarding 
against  evil  propensities.  And  it  was  only 
under  certain  circumstances  that  he  al- 
lowed celibacy  to  be  efficacious,  as  a 
means  of  attending  to  Divine  things,  with 
less  interruption  from  earthly  cares.J 

(c.)  Vahntinus  and  his  Sclwol. 

Next  to  Basilides  we  place  Valentinus, 
who  was  contemporary  with  him, although 
a  little  later.  If  we  judge  from  his  Hellen- 
istic expressions,  and  the  Aramaic  names, 
whicii  appear  in  his  system,  he  was  of 
Jewish  origin.  He  was  born  an  Egyp- 
tian,§  and  most  probably  he  owes  his 
education  likewise  to  Alexandria.  He 
travelled  thence  to  Rome,  where  he  ap- 
pears to  have  passed  the  latter  part  of  his 
life;  and  this  gave  him  an  opportunity  of 
making  his  doctrines  more  known,  and 
propagating  them  in  these  regions  also. 
In  his  fundamental  notions  he  agreed 
with  Basilides;  it  was  only  in  (he  man- 
ner of  explaining  them,  and  in  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  images  in  which  he 
developed  his  ideas,  that  he  differed  from 
him.  But  as  people  did  not  carefully  dis- 
tinguish from  one  another,  the  doctrines 
of  the   founders  of  Gnostic  schools,  and 


*   Strom.  1.  c  o'rav  ii  ji  ti^t^is-TM  tm  tif  umoiv 

UTroTiT-ll. 

■j-  Strom,  iii.  427.   [See  note  first  column.] 
i   Strom.  Ill),  iii.,  from  the  beginning. 
§  According  to   the   account   given  by  Epi- 
phanius. 

z 


SELF-LIMITATION    OF   THE    BYTHOS. 


266 

those  of  their  later  followers,  by  wliora 
these  doctrines  had  only  been  modified 
in  a  peculiar  manner,  and  as  they  joined 
with  the  Valentinian  system  many  kindred 
doctrines,  which  flowed  from  one  com- 
mon source,  it  is  difficult,  from  the  repre- 
sentations whicli  have  come  down  to  us, 
to  determine  with  certainty  what  doctrines 
properly  belonged  to  Valentinus  himself, 
as  the  founder  of  the  school. 

What  the  Svfai/.ai  were  with  Basilides, 
the  jEons*  were  with  Valentinus  ;  but  the 
following  notion  is  peculiar  to  him,  namely, 
that  as  the  veil  (or  covering)  of  all  life 
resides  in  the  original  source  of  all  exist- 
ence, (the  Bythos,)  but  is  not  yet  un- 
folded, together  with  the  development  of 
life  that  proceeds  from  that  first  source, 
members  which  mutually  supply  the  de- 
fects of  each  other  form  themselves,  that 
is  to  say  jEons,  both  male  and  female,  one 
of  which  is  chiefly  generative^  the  other 
receptive  ;]  and  that  by  the  mutual  com- 
munication of  these  J^^ons  the  chain  of 
that  development  of  life  constantly  goes  on. 
The  female  is  the  supplement  of  the  male, 
TO  7rAu§w/xa,J  and  the  perfect  line  of  ^ons 
is  now  considered  as  a  whole,  as  the 
fulness  of  the  Divine  life  streaming  out  of 
the  Bythos,  which  must  again  be  con- 
stantly rendered  fruitful,  as  it  were,  by  it, 
(the  Divine  life,)  and  it  is  called,  m  rela- 
tion to  him,  the  female,  the  Pleroma  !  The 
hidden  being  of  God  cannot  be  known  by 
any  one  ;  it  is  the  absolutely  uyniXTrov ;  it 
it  only  in  as  far  as  he  has  revealed  himself 
in  the  unfolding  of  his  powers  or  iEons, 
that  he  can  be  recognised.  All  individual 
iEons,  in  their  varied  modes  of  revelation, 
are  called  forms  and  names  of  that  Being,§ 
who,  in  his  secret  existence  is  incon- 
ceivable, not-to-be-named,  and  elevated 
above  conceptions  and  images,  just  as  the 
Monogenes,  that  first  self-revelation  of 
the  hidden  Being,  is  called  peculiarly  the 
Invisible  Name  of  the  Bythos.  It  is  an 
idea  deeply  rooted  in  the  Valentinian  sys- 
tem, that  since  all  existence  has  its  founda- 
tion in  the  self-limitation  of  the  Bythos, 
so  also  the  existence  of  all  created  being 


depends  on  limitation.  When  every  thing 
remains  within  the  limits  of  its  peculiar 
sphere,  and  is  that  which  it  ought  to  be 
according  to  its  assigned  position  in  the 
development  of  life,  then  every  thing  can 
dovetail  together  well,  and  a  just  harmony 
exist  in  the  chain  of  the  development  of 
life.  As  soon  as  any  being  endeavours  to 
overpass  these  limits, — as  soon  as  ever  a 
being,  instead  of  recognising  God  in  the 
revelation  which  he  makes  of  himself  to 
that  being,  according  to  his  position, — 
emboldens  himself  so  as  to  wish  to  pene- 
trate into  His  hidden  Being,  it  runs  a 
risk  of  sinking  into  annihilation.  Instead 
of  laying  hold  of  that  which  is  real,  it 
loses  itself  in  that  which  is  without  ex- 
istence. The  Horos  (o^o?,)  the  Genius  of 
limitation,  of  bounding,  (the  power  of 
truth  personified,  which  assigns  and  sets 
fast  the  boundaries  of  each  individual 
being,  which  watches  over  those  bounda- 
ries, and  when  they  are  broken  restores 
them,)  therefore,  takes  an  important  place 
in  the  system  of  Valentinus.  Gnosis  is 
here,  as  it  were,  giving  testimony  against 
itselfl  The  ideas  of  the  Horos  and  the 
Redeemer  must  have  been  much  akin  to 
each  other  in  the  Valentinian  system,  and 
in  fact  the  Horos  was  called  by  many  the 


\v'v^uryj<; 


and 


aurri^, 


the    Redeemer  and 


*  See  the  explanation  of  this  won],  p.  261, 
f  Just  as  in  all  the  rest  of  the  creation,  which 
represents  an  imacje  of  that  higher  world,  this  two- 
fold line  of  agents  is  to  be  found. 

t  nxipM/za.  These  Theosophs,  who  certainly 
<lid  not  scrupulously  adhere  to  the  strict  grammati- 
cal meaning  of  terms,  i)erhaps  understood  this 
word  both  ill  an  active  and  a  passive  sense  at  the 
same  time,  and  applied  it  both  to  to  TrKhpuuv  and 

To  TTKWjVfJLi^'.l. 

§  The  ^ons  are  fji.of<^M  tow  ©sow,  oyofxxTit  tow 
asmofA.stT'riu. 


Saviour;  and  we  find  traces  which  indi- 
cate that  he  was  meant  to  represent  only 
one  mode  of  operation  of  the  one  redeem- 
ing Spirit, — that  Spirit  which,  according 
to  the  different  places  of  his  operations, 
that  extend  themselves  throughout  all  the 
stages  of  existence,  and  according  to  his 
diflerent  modes  of  operation,  is  betokened 
by  different  names,  and  by  others  is  di- 
vided into  different  persons,  (Hypostases.) 
The  Valentinians  ascribe  two  modes  of 
operation  to  this  Horos;  the  one  of  a  ne- 
gative kind,  by  means  of  which  he  lays 
down  the  limits  for  all  existence,  and  se- 
parates and  removes  from  it  all  that  is 
foreign  to  it;*  and  in  virtue  of  this  power 
he  is  properly  called  h^oi  ;  and  the  other 
is  that  operation,  by  means  of  which  he 
sets  fast  and  establishes,  in  their  peculiar 
sphere  and  forms,  all  those  beings  who  are 
purified  from  that,  which,  being  foreign 
to  tlieir  nature,  troubles  their  existence  \\ 
and  in  virtue  of  this  power  he  is  called 
aTctv^oii^  a  word  which  is  used  both  for  a 
cross,  and  a  slake  or  bulwark  ;  to  both 
of  which  meanings  the  Valentinians  here 
made  allusion.     Their  remarks  on  those 


*  The  hifiyv^  /utfiJ'Tuyt  **/  JiipiTruui. 
■j"  The  hipyux  hSfi-j.yTiK>i  x.3U  <rriipi(TTiKn. 


THREE    STAGES    OF    BEING.  267 

sayings  of  the  Redeemer  in  which  they  i  are  akin  to  aotptx,  to  tlie  soul  of  the 
thought  they  recognised  the  Horos,  make  \  world,  and  to  the  Pleroma. 
their  ideas  on  the  subject  plain.  Thus  j  2.  The  (pvarn;  -vj/v;^.**!,  or  such  natures 
they  referred  Luke  xiv.  27,  to  the  es-  \  as  proceeded  from  the  life  that  had  been 
tahlishing  power  of  the  Horos,*  and  '  divided  by  admixture  with  the  bxr, ;  and 
Matthew  x.  34,  and  Mark  x.  21,  to  /(/s  i  an  entirely  new  stage  of  being  begins  with 
separating  power.1[  In  the  first  of  these  these  natures,  an  image  of  llie  higher 
passages,  according  to  them,  our  Saviour  world,  but  in  a  subordinate  position 
means  that  only  those  persons  can  be  his  j  3.  The  ungodly,  which  is  opposed  to 
disciples  who  bear  his  cross,  i.  e.  who  \  all  improvement ;  the  being  which  can 
give  themselves  up  to  that  Divine  power  J  only  disturb,  and  is  entirely  the  slave  of 
of  the  Redeemer  which  is  symbolically  i  blind  desires  and  passions, 
represented  by  the  cross,  and  suffer  them-  There  is  only  a  difference  of  degree. 
selves  to  be  formed  and  firmly  established  between  all,  which  proceeds  from  the  un- 
by  it  in  his  own  peculiar  way.  In  the  folding  of  the  I)ivine  life  (which  flows 
second  passage  our  Saviour  hints  at  his  forth  from  the  Bythos  through  the  iEons,) 
Divine  purifying  power,  by  which  he  from  the  Pleroma  downwards  to  its  seed, 
clears  that  which  is  akin  to  God  from  the  j  which  has  fallen  down  into  human  nature 
admixture  of  the  ungodly,  and  produces  — that  seed  which,  being  sown,  must 
the  annihilation  of  the  latter.;!:  Both  are  attain  its  ripeness  in  the  earthly  world ;  but 
intimately  connected  togedier,  the  clear-  between  those  three  classes  of  being  there 
ance  from  the  foreign  admixture  of  the  is  an  cs5('7J/ta/ difference  o/na/ifre.  Each 
iMi  from  intermixture  with  which  this  ir-  [  one,  therefore,  of  these  classes  must  have 
regular,  indefinite,  and  unquiet  vacillation  i  its  own  independent  principle  which  pre- 
between  existence  and  non-existence  pro-  j  dominates  in  it,  although  every  process 
ceeds,  and  a  firm  establishment  in  a  de-  [  of  improvement  and  development  leads 
finite,  peculiar.  Divine  existence,  un-  back  in  the  end  to  the  Bythos,  which 
mingled  with  any  thing  else.  works  on  every  thing  by  means  of  various 

]f  Basilides  deduced  the  intermixture  of  i  organs  in  the  various  grades  of  being,  and 
the  Divine  with  matter  from  an  assault  of  j  whose  law  is  the  only  ruling  one.  He 
the  kingdom  of  darkness  upon  the  king- !  cannot,  however,  himself  enter  into  any 
dom  of  light,  on  the  contrary,  Valentinus  |  inmiediate  connection  with  that  which  is 
deduced  it  from  a  commotion  that  arose  ;  foreign  to  him,  and,  therefore,  in  that  sub- 
in  the  Pleroma,  and  a  descent  of  the  Di-  ordinate  grade  of  being  which  lies  be- 
vine  seed  of  life  from  the  Pleroma  into  tween  the  perfect  or  Divine,  and  the  un- 
niatter,  consequent  upon  that  commotion,  godly  or  material,  there  must  exist  a  Being 
He  acknowledged,  as  well  as  Basilides,  a '  as  the  image  of  the  Most  High,*  which, 
Divine  wisdom,  which  revealed  itself  in  j  while  it  thinks  that  it  acts  independently, 
the  world  ;  but  here,  also,  in  his  view,  the  must  yet  serve  the  universal  law,  from 
lower  is  only  an  image  of  tlie  higher.  It  j  which  nothing  is  exempt,  for  the  realiza- 
is  not  the  Divine  wisdom  itself,  not  the  j  tion  of  the  ideas  of  the  Supreme  even  to 
jEon  o-oifjja  herself,  but  the  untimely  fruit  i  the  very  extreme  limits  of  matter.  This 
of  her  travail,  which  is  to  unfold  itself  j  Being  is  in  the  psychical  world,  what  the 
and  arrive  at  its  maturity  only  by  degrees,  j  Bythos  is  in  the  higher  world,  only  with 
He  distinguishes  between  an  uvu  and  a  |  this  difierence,  that  it  involuntarily  acts 
xaTO)  o-&<p»a  ( Achamolh  :)§  this  latter  is  the   as  the  organ  of  the  former ;  and  this  being 


soul  of  tlie  world,  from  the  admixture  of 
which  with  the  iM  all  living  existence  is 
produced,  and  is  in  difierent  stages,  higher, 
in  proportion  as  it  can  keep  itself  clearer 
from  connection  with  the  u^r),  and  lower, 
in  proportion  as  it  is  attracted  and  af- 
fected by  matter.  There  exist,  there- 
fore, these  three  stages  of  being. 


is  the  Demiurgos  of  Valentinus.  Tlie 
Hyle  also  has  its  principle,  which  repre- 
sents it,  and  through  which  it  operates; 
but  by  its  very  nature  it  is  not  of  a  form- 
ing and  creative,  hut  of  a  destructive  kind  : 
this  is  Satan. 

1.  The  nature  of  the  Trveu^aTixo*  is  that 
which   is  essentially  akin    to   God  {the 


1.  The  (pvam  vtiv/xeiriKen,  or  those  o/jkuova-iov  ru  ©£«,)  and  thence  comes  sim- 
Divine  seeds  of  life,  which  arc  elevated  pie  and  undivided  existence,!  the  life  of 
above  matter  by  their  nature,  and  which  }  unity  or  oneness  (ovaia.  inxv  fj-oton^n^.) 

*  The  iyu>}ft3L  <rr:pt7TiKM  )i»i 'bf^ua-TMn 
t  The  ivifyii^  /utifio-rix.»  mu  iiopij^iiut. 
i  Irena?us  i.  c.  3.  §  5. 


•  The  ^wcT«f. 

■j-  [The  German  is  here  "  das  Lebcn  der  Ein- 
heit."  I  think  in  English  the  same  idea  would  be 
better  rendered  '  oneness  of  existence.' — H.  J.  R.] 


268 


2.  The  Being  of  the  -^vyjKoi,  divided 
into  number  and  variety,  but  still  sub- 
mitting itself  to  a  higher  unity,  and  allow- 
ing itself  to  be  guided  by  that  unity,  at  first 
unconsciously,  afterwards  consciously. 

3.  The  Being  of  Satan  and  his  whole 
kingdom :  mere  opposition  to  all  unity ; 
the  Being  divided  and  distracted  in  itself, 
without  any  capability  for  unity,  or  any 
point  for  unity  to  begin  from ;  and  with 
all  this,  an  endeavour  to  destroy  all  unity, 
to  spread  its  oum  indwelling  distraction 
over  every  thing,  and  to  distract  every 
thing.* 

In  that  first  grade  of  being,  the  life, 
which,  by  its  very  nature,  is  eternal, 
exists  as  something  inalienable,  a  neces- 
sary afGafo-ia;  the  •v)/v;)(;;»Ko»,  on  the  Con- 
trary, stands  in  the  middle  between  im- 
mortal and  mortal.  The  -^vx^tyioi  obtain 
immortality,  or  they  become  subject  to 
death,  according  as  they  give  themselves 
up  by  their  inclinations  to  the  Divine  or 
to  ungodliness.  The  nature  of  Satan, 
like  that  of  the  ix*),  is  death  itself,  anni- 
hilation, the  negation  of  all  existence, 
which,  in  the  end,  when  all  existence, 
which  has  been  divided  by  its  means, 
shall  have  developed  itself  to  the  full  ex- 
tent of  all  its  properties,  and  sliall  have 
fixed  itself  sufficiently  in  itself,  shall  then 
destroy  itself  in  itself,  being  overcome  by 
the  power  of  the  positive,  after  it  (the 
negative,  annihilating  power,)  has  drawn 
to  itself  all  its  kindred  ungodliness.  The 
existence  of  the  first  is  the  pure  develop- 
ment of  life  from  within, — an  activity 
which  is  not  directed  outwards,  and 
which  has  no  obstacles  to  overcome;  and 
a  tranquillity  which  is  a  life  and  action. 

2.  The  existence  of  the  v>.v)  is  of  itself, 
and  by  its  own  nature,  the  stillness  of 
death  ;  but  after  a  spark  of  life  has  fallen 
into  it,  and  communicated  to  it  a  certain 
something  analogous  to  life,  it  becomes 
in  its  representative,  Satan,  a  wild  kmd 
of  self-contradicting  impulse. 

3.  To  the  Demiurgos,  and  to  those  that 
are  his,  namely,  the  Psychical,  there  is 
peculiarly  assigned  an  activity  directed 
outwardly  ;  an  impelling  activity  :  they 
desire  to  do  much,  as  it  usually  happens 
with  such  busy  people,  without  rightly 
understanding  what  they  do,f — without 
becoming  themselves  properly  conscious 
of  the  ideas  which  direct  them.]; 


VALENTINUS    ON   REDEMPTION. 


*  The  oua-ti  TroKva-^iim,  which   endeavours  to 
assimilate  every  thing  to  itself. 

+  The  documents  on  wliich  this  rests  will  be 


The  doctrine  of  the  redemption  took 
also  a  very  important  place  in  the  Valen- 
tinian  system,  and  peculiarly  forms  its 
centre  point;  but  it  was  by  him,  even  more 
than  by  Basilides,  removed  from  the  re- 
gions of  practical  things  into  those  of  spe- 
culation and  metaphysics.  As,  according  to 
his  system,  a  process  of  the  development 
of  life  pervades  all  regions  of  existence, 
and  as  the  disharmony,  which,  as  far  as  its 
seed  is  concerned,  first  arose  in  the  Ple- 
roma  itself,  beginning  thence,  has  spread 
itself  farther,*  so  the  ichole  course  of  the 
world  can  only  then  first  attain  its  proper 
object^  when  harmony  shall  be  again  re- 
stored, m  all  grades  of  existence  ^  as  well  as 
in  the  Pleroma ;  that  which  happens  in 
the  Pleroma  must  be  imaged  in  all  other 
grades  of  existence.  And  thus,  therefore, 
as  the  work  of  redemption  takes  place  in 
different  stages  of  existence  and  the  same 
law  is  here  fulfilled  in  difl'erent  forms, 
and  in  different  conditions,  it  is  the  same 
agent  of  the  revelation  of  the  hidden 
God,  the  same  agent,  through  whom  the 
life  that  streamed  forth  from  God  be- 
comes united  with  him  again,  who,  con- 
tinuing his  work,  till  the  completion  of  the 
whole,  is  imaged  (or  reflected)  in  different 
hypostases,  wherever  he  is  perfecting  his 
work  in  different  stages  of  existence.  So 
it  is  the  same  idea  which  is  represented  in 
a  Monogenes,  a  Logos,  a  Christus,  and  a 
Soter.  The  Soter  is  the  Redeemer  for 
the  whole  of  the  world  that  lies  beyond 
the  Pleroma,  and  therefore,  also  the  plastic 
Being  for  that  world  ;  for  in  this  system, 
to  form  and  to  redeem  hang  closely 
together,  as  is  already  evident  from  the 
twofold  operations  of  the  Horos.  By 
means  of  this  formative  process^  the 
higher  nature  is  first  made  free  from  the 
matter  that  adheres  to  it;  and  out  of  an 
unorganic,  formless  being,  is  unfolded 
into  a  definite,  organized  being,  gifted 
with  individual  qualities."]"  It  is  by  means 
of  redemption  that  the  higlier  property 
first  attains  to  its  mature  and  perfect  de- 
velopment, and  to  clear  consciousness. 
Redemption  is  the  completion  of  the  for- 
mative process.  All  the  Divine  life  of 
j  the    Pleroma    concentrates  itself,  and  is 

found  in  the  writings  of  Heracleon,  quoted  hy 
Origen,   torn.   xiii.  Joh.  c.  16,  25,  30,  51,  59; 
j  torn.  XX.  c.  20. 

*  The  foundation  of  the  whole  of  the  new 
j  creation,  lying  licyond  the  Pleroma,  which  new 
j  creation  can  proceed  from  division  alone. 

f  [Literally,  "into  a  definite,  individual,  and 
i  organized  being." — H.  J.  R.] 


THE    PLASTIC    SOTER. IMAGE    OF    GOD    IN   THE    CREATION. 


reflected  in  the  Soter,  and  through  him  [ 
extends  its  operations  for  the  individual- 
izing of  the  Divine  life,  in  order  that  the 
spiritual  natures,  which  are  akin  to  the ' 
Pleroma,  may  be  sown  abroad  in  the 
M'orld,  and  ripen  into  perfect  existence. 
The  Christus  of  the  Pleroma  is  the  work- 
ing principle,  the  Sotqr  beyond  the  Ple- 
roma* is  the  receiving,  the  forming,  and 
the  perfecting  principle. f 

The  Soter  first  proves  his  redeeming 
and  forming  power  on  that  still  imperfect 
soul  of  the  world,  which  came  from  the 
Pleroma,  as  this  soul  must,  at  some  lime 
or  other,  spread  itself  abroad  over  all  the 
spiritual  natures  that  are  akin  to  it,  and  I 
which  sprouted  forth  from  it,  as  the  uni- 
versal mother  of  spiritual  life  in  the  lower  j 
world.  (See  above.)  The  Soter  is  the  ] 
proper  fashioner  and  governor  of  the 
world,  as  he  is  the  Redeemer;  for  the 
formation  of  the  world  is  the  first  begin- 
ning of  the  process  of  development,  which 
can  only  be  brought  to  completion  by 
means  of  redemption.  The  Soter,  as  the 
inward  active  principle,  puts  into  the  soul- 
of-the-world,J  destined  to  make  up  a 
syzygy§  with  him,  the  formative  ideas, 
and  she  communicates  them  to  the  Demi- 
urgos,  who  imagines  that  he  is  acting 
independently;  and  he,  unconsciously  to 
himself,  under  this  cultivation  becomes 
animated  and  influenced  by  the  power  of 
these  ideas.  Whilst  Valentinus||  repre- 
sented the  Demiurgos  and  the  world 
fashioned  and  animated  by  him  as  one 
whole,  he  paints  this  whole  as  an  image 

•     In  the  TCTTOf    ^KTOT^TiC. 

■j-  Thus  Heracleon  says  of  the  Soter,  in  rela- 
tion to  Christians,  that  the  former  receives  the 
Divine  seed  out  of  the  Pleroma  from  the  latter,  as 
a  yd  undeveloped  seed;  and  that  he  communi- 
cates to  it  the  formation  into  a  definite  and  sepa- 
rate being — rnv  nitinw  /jii^f^mT-iv  tuv  a-^tx  ytn^iv, 
iU  Mi^ifJiv,  nut  (puriiTfx'jV,  tcrti  7rifiiyg:t<p>iv  aytnyoiv  x.^ 
civaja|af.  Origen,  Joh.  t.  ii.  c.  1.5.  To  bring  to 
light,  loform,  and  to  individualize,  are  identical 
ideas  among  the  Gnostics.  The  indefinite,  the 
unorganic,  corresponds  in  spiritual  beings  to  the 
i,K>f.  Thus  in  the  Valentinian  fragment  in  Ire- 
na;us  i.  c.  8.  §  4,  the  /j.'.^<p'M\i,  <^ufTi<^uv,  (favai'.uv,  is 
opposed  to  the  7ri>c0:txkuy  (rm^/uiTiKox  t»v  o\>'v 
bia-Ktv.  Christus  sows  the  seed,  the  Soter  harvests 
it.     Origen,  Joh.  i.  13.  p.  48. 

t   KsiTOJ  o-i<pi!t,  Achamoth. 

§  [It  will  be  remembered  that  in  this  system  all 
the  ^^ons  were  evolved  by  pairs,  or  syzygies. — 
H.  .T.  R.] 

II  After  Plato,  who  considers  the  Spirit  that 
fashions  the  world,  and  the  world  animated  by 
him.  as  one  whole,  one  e^c  ^jvxtoc,  sv  ^itcv ;  and 
after  the  example  of  Philo,  who  represents  the 
Ac^c,  and  the  body  of  the  world  animated  by 
him,  as  one  whole. 


269 

of  the  glory  of  God,  sketched  by  the 
Soter,  as  by  a  painter.  But,  to  say  the 
truth,  as  every  image,  from  its  very  nature, 
is  an  impeifect  representation  of  the  ori- 
ginal prototype,  and  can  be  rightly  under- 
stood only  by  him  who  has  the  power  of 
behoKling  tiic  original, — thus  also  the 
Demiurgos,  with  his  creation,  is  only  an 
imperfect  image  of  the  glory  of  God;  and 
he  alone  who  has  received  in  his  inward 
soul  the  revelation  of  the  invisible  Divine 
Being,  can  rightly  understand  the  world 
as  the  image,  and  the  Demiurgos  as  the 
propliet,  of  the  Supreme  God.  The  in- 
ward revelation  (which  is  the  portion  of 
the  7rv£f/L*aTixot)  is  an  authentication  of 
the  outward,  an  authentication  of  the 
Demiurgos  as  the  representative  of  God. 
Valentinus  himself  expresses  this  thus:* 
"  as  much  as  the  picture  is  less  than  the 
living  countenance,  so  much  the  world  is 
less  than  the  living  God.  And  what  is 
the  cause  of  the  picture  ?  The  greatness 
of  the  countenance,  which  afforded  the 
original  to  the  painter,  in  order  to  be- 
come honoured  by  the  manifestation  of 
his  name ;  for  no  form  has  been  invented 
as  an  independent  thing.  But  as  the 
name  of  the  thing  itself  supplies  that 
which  is  wanting  in  the  paintings,  so 
also  the  invisible  Godf  acts  for  the 
authentication  of  the  image  which  is 
made." 

It  is  a  fundamental  notion  of  the  Valen- 
tinian and   of  all  Gnostic  systems,  that 
man  is  destined  to  represent  and  to  main- 
I  tain  the  connection  between   the  higher 
I  world  and  the  empire  of  the  Demiurgos, 
I  that  is,  to  reveal  the  Supreme  God  in  this 
world.    Human  nature,  and  the  revelation 
of  God,  are  here   kindred  notions ;  and 
I  hence  i\\e  first  mavi^,  [Urmensch]  was  one 
of  the  Valentinian  J?Lons;  and,  according 
to  other  Valentinian  systems,  it  was  said, 
"  When  God  wished   to  reveal    himself, 
this  was  called  ??ir/?i."§     The  Demiurgos 
I  created  man,  to  image  and  represent  him- 
self; he  breathed  into  him  a  soul  akin  to 

I       *   Clem.  Strom,  lib.  iv.  509.     [Sylb.  p.  218. 

Potter,  p.  603.     Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  326-7.] 

[The  quotation  from  Valentinus  is  probably 
I  corrupt,  and  recjuires  the  alteration  of  ejrwi^a'a-ay  into 
:  iTKwucri)/,  which  the  common  interpreters,  as  well 

as  ISeander,  have  made.  The  only  difficulty  lies 
I  in  the  latter  part,  which  I  here  quote :  t/c  -.w  ctWut. 

'•  ^a^-)f)u<pai  Tov  TUTr'ji,  ivu.  Tiunb^  Si   iyi'.[/.i.'r(.<;  olutcu:  au 

TO  ClTTtf.n'T^V  JV  TTKrtlTti. H.  J.   R.] 

■j-  God's  invisible  Being. 
I       \  The  Adam  Kadinon  of  the  Cabbala. 
'      §  See  Iran.  Ub.  i.  c.  12.  §  4. 

z2 


270 


VALENTINIAN    NOTION    OF    INSPIRATION. 


his  own  being.  But,  even  here,  he  was 
acting  as  the  instrument  of  a  higher  Being. 
Man  was  to  represent  that  first  man.  With- 
out the  Demiurgos  being  conscious  of  it, 
the  Sophia  communicated  to  him  the  spi- 
ritual seed,  which  he  transplanted  into  the 
soul  of  man;  and  thence  it  happened  that 
man  at  once  revealed  something  which  was 
of  a  more  elevated  nature  than  the  whole 
creation,  into  which  he  entered ;  so  that 
the  Demiurgos  himself,  and  his  angels, 
were  seized  with  astonishment,  for  as  yet 
they  knew  nothing  of  a  higher  world. 
The  Demiurgos  thought  that  he  himself 
was  an  independent  ruler;  but  now,  to 
his  astonishment,  he  saw  a  higher  power 
enter  into  his  dominions.  This  astonish- 
ment is  universally  repeated,  wherever 
man,  limited  as  he  is,  being  animated  by 
the  ideas  of  a  higher  world,  expresses 
them  in  his  works,  as  in  art,  and  indeed, 
universally,  where  the  hands  of  men  exe- 
cute any  thing  in  relation  to  tlie  name 
of  God.  Thus  it  happens  that  men  fall 
down  and  worship  their  own  images, 
being  filled  with  a  reverential  astonish- 
ment by  the  sensation*  of  a  higher  power, 
which  is  unknown  to  them.  We  will 
bring  forward  the  words  of  the  man  him- 
self: "And  just  as  the  angel  was  seized 
•with  fear  at  that  creature  (■7r^«(7/>l«,)  when 
it  spoke  of  loftier  things  than  such  as 
suited  its  creation,  by  means  of  him  who 
had  invisibly  communicated  to  it  the  seed 
of  the  life  from  above,  (namely,  the  Soter,) 
and  when  it  spoke  with  freedom  and  con- 
fidence,— so  also,  in  the  race  of  the  men 
of  this  world,  the  works  of  man  become 
a  terror  even  to  those  who  made  them, 
such  as  pillars,  and  statues,  and  every 
thing  which  the  hands  of  all  men  execute 
in  honour  of  the  name  ofGod."t 

But  that  which  human  nature  was  uni- 
versally to  represent,  became  now  really 
brought  to  pass  only  in  those  spiritual 
men.t  Through  them  was  the  life-giving, 
purifying  principle  of  the  Divinity  to  be 
spread  abroad,  and  penetrate  oven  to  the 
utmost  limits  of  the  vXv]  these  spiritual 
natures  are  the  salt  and  the  light  of  the 
earth,  the  leaven  for  all  the  race  of  man. 
The  ^vxri  is  only  the  vcluculum  for  the 
7rr£ff*aTt>!oc,  in  order  that  it  may  be  able  to 
enter  into  the  temporal  world,  in  which 
it  is  to  develope  itself  to  maturity.     When 


*  [AhnuniT.  Literally,  a  pre.te«/t/nen/.  It  ex- 
presses here  a  feclinp;  inclicating  a  sen>!e  that  leads 
us  to  recoijiiise  this  hi<,'her  power. — H.  J.  It.] 

f  Cletn.  Strom.  Ill),  ii.  375.  [Sylb.  p.  161. 
Potter,  p.  448.    Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  145.] 

\  The  i^wjttz  wiUfAXTUM. 


I  this  aim  shall  have  been  attained,  the 
spirit,  which  is  only  destined  for  the  life 
I  of  intuition,*  will  leave  thatvehiculum  in 
the  lower  sphere ;  and  every  spiritual 
nature,  as  the  female  and  recipient  ele- 
1  ment  in  regard  to  the  higher  world  of 
spirits,  will  be  elevated  in  the  Pleroma  to 
its  syzygy  with  the  angelic  nature  which 
corresponds  to  it.  Only  the  highest  and 
immediate  intuitive  powers  (that  is  the 
meaning  of  Valentinus,)  will  then  come 
into  operation.  All  the  powers  and  modes 
of  operation  of  the  soul,  which  are  directed 
to  that  which  is  temporal  and  perishable, 
— such  as  its  powers  of  reflection,  and 
the  understanding,  in  which,  according  to 
Valentinus,  is  contained  the  4't/;!^^*),  will 
then  utterly  cease.f 

The  attractive  power,  with  which  the 
Divine  Being  works  on  every  thing,  with- 
out those  who  receive  the  impression  un- 
derstanding it,  or  being  able  to  explain  it 
to  themselves,  is  a  favourite  notion  with 
Valentinus.  The  Demiurgos  was  attracted 
by  the  spiritual  natures  which  were  scat- 
tered among  the  Jewish  people,  without 
being  conscious  of  the  reason  of  it.  He 
made  them,  therefore,  prophets,  priests, 
and  kings.  Therefore,  it  ha{)pened  that 
the  prophets  were  enabled  especially  to 
hint  at  the  higher  order  of  things,  which 
should  be  brought  among  men  by  the 
Soter.  According  to  Valentinus,  a  four- 
fold principle  acted  upon  the  Prophets  : — 

1.  The  psychical  principle,  the  human 
and  limited  soul,  the  unassisted  soul. 

2.  The  spirltualization  of  this  -^vxty 
which  is  derived  from  the  Demiurgos 
working  upon  it. 

3.  The  unassisted  vvtviJiciTtyoy. 

4.  The  pneumatical  spirltualization, 
which  is  derived  from  the  influence  of 
the  Sophia.J 

Thus  Valentinus,  in  reference  to  these 
four  principles,  could  distinguish  in  the 
writings  of  the  prophets,  different  pro- 
mises of  a  higher  and  lower  character 
and  meaning,  and  a  higher  and  lower 
sense,  which  differed  from  each  other,  in 
the  same  passage. 

1.  The  mere  human  sayings. 

2.  The  single  prophecies  of  future 
events,  which  the  Demiurgos,  who, 
although  not  Omniscient,  yet  looked  into 
a  wider  circle  of  the  future,  was  able  to 
communicate;  and    the    prophecies  of  a 


*   [Das  Leben  der  Anschauung.     See  Preface. 
— H.  i.  R.] 

f  Comp.  Aristot.  de  Anima.,  lib.  iii,  c,  5. 
4  See  Iren.  Ub.  i.  c.  16,  §  3,  4. 


TRACES    OP    TRUTH    AMOXG    HEATHENS. 


2T1 


Messiah,  which  came  also  from  the  same 
source,  but  were  still  enveloped  in  a  tein- 
ponil  and  Jewish  form ;  the  prophecies 
of  a  Messiah,  such  as  the  Demiurgos 
Avould  send, — a  Psychical  Messiali  for  the 
Psychical  world,  the  ruler  of  a  kingdom 
of  this  world. 

3.  The  ideas  which  verged  upon  the 
Cliristiau  economy,  and  pointed  to  it,  the 
enlightened  Messianic  notions,  brought 
forward  in  more  or  less  purity,  according 
as  they  proceeded  purely  from  the  higher 
spiritual  natures,  or  the  itrmiediate  influ- 
ence of  the  Sopliia.  This  view  might 
lead  to  remarkable  investigations  as  to 
the  mixture  of  the  Divine  and  human  in 
the  prophets,  and  introduce  conclusions 
which  would  be  fruitful  towards  the 
interpretation  of  the  prophets  themselves. 
The  Valentinian  view  was  opposed  to  the 
determination  of  those,  who,  in  spite  of 
the  words  of  Christ  in  Matt.  xi.  9,  &.C., 
and  in  spite  of  1  Pet.  i.  12,  attributed  a 
perfect  and  Christian  knowledge  to  the 
prophets.  It  may  be  asked,  whether  Va- 
lentinus  recognised  the  beams  of  higher 
truth  only  among  the  Jews;  whether  he 
allowed  the  existence  of  spiritual  natures 
only  among  the  Jews,  or  whether  he 
acknowledged  that  they  were  spread 
abroad  also  among  the  heathen.  Accord- 
ing to  Heracleon,*  he  held  the  Jews  to  be 
the  kingdom  of  the  Demiurgos, — the 
Heathen  the  kingdom  of  Matter,  or  of 
Satan, — and  the  Christians  ttie  people  of 
the  Supreme  God ;  but  this  does  not 
prove  that  he  excluded  from  the  heathen 
all  that  belongs  to  the  superior  race ;  be- 
cause, although  he  expressly  assigned 
Judaism  to  the  Demiurgos,  he  supposed 
that  it  contained  some  scattered  seeds 
of  the  higher  pneumatical  system ;  and 
although  he  assigned  Christianity  to  the 
Supreme  God,  he  saw  also,  even  among 
the  Christians,  a  large  class  of  Psychical 
persons.  He,  therefore,  only  speaks  of 
the  prevailing  ingredients ;  aiul  therefore, 
notwithstanding  tlie  prevailing  state  of 
the  Ixrt  among  the  heathen,  he  might  re- 
cognise scattered  seeds  of  the  pneu- 
matical. He  was  in  fact  obliged  to  con- 
fess this  according  to  his  own  principles, 
according  to  which  the  higher  spiritual 
principle  of  life  (the  irvtvj.ci.TiKov)  was  to 
pervade  all  grades  of  being  even  to  the 
very  I. mils  of  matter,  in  order  to  prepare 
the  universal  ahnihilation  of  the  uAj). 
What  Valentin  us  says,  in  the  passage 
above  quoted,  of  the  power  of  art,  which 

*  Origen,  in  Job.  t.  xiii.  ^  16. 


turns  itself  to  tlie  formation  of  idols, 
allows  us  to  conclude  that  he.  judged  the 
polytheistic  system  more  mildly  than  the 
common  Jews,  to  whom  the  idols  were 
only  evil  spirits,  and  that  he,  supporting 
himself  by  Acts  xvii.  23,  believed  that 
even  in  this  system,  although  it  was 
sullied  by  the  prevalence  of  the  hylic 
principle,  there  might  be  observed  traces 
of  an  unknown  God,  who  spread  his 
unrecognised  influence  over  all  things. 
Thus  Valentinus,  in  a  still  extant  frag- 
ment of  a  homily,*  actually  hints  at  the 
traces  of  truth  spread  about  even  in  the 
writings  of  the  heathen,  in  which  the 
inward  being  of  the  spiritual  people  of 
God,  or  of  the  ■sri'£t;/x:tT»Koi,  who  are 
spread  abroad  in  the  whole  world,  reveals 
itself.  "  Much  of  that  which  is  written 
in  the  books  of  the  heathen,  is  found 
written  in  the  Church  ai  God;  this  com- 
mon part  is  the  voice  out  of  the  heart, 
the  law  written  in  the  heart;  this  is  that 
people  of  the  beloved  (t.  e.  this  higher 
consciousness  which  is  found  in  common, 
is  the  mark  of  the  scattered  community 
of  the  Soter,  the  7rr£i;/xaT»itot,)  which  is 
beloved  by  him,  and  loves  him  in  return." 

The  Soter^  who  from  the  beginning  had 
conducted  the  lohole  process  of  the  deve- 
lopment of  the  spiritual  seed  of  life, 
which  had  fallen  down  from  out  of 
the  Pleroma  for  the  formation  of  a 
new  world,  the  invisible  Faskiont'r  and 
Ruler  of  this  new  world, — was  now 
obliged  at  last,  himself,  to  act  upon  the 
course  of  the  world,  without  any  inferme' 
diate  agency,  in  order  to  spread  forth  the 
act  of  redemption,  which  he  had  originally 
perfected  in  the  mother  of  all  spiritual  life, 
the  soul  of  the  world,  or  the  Sophia, — 
upon  all  the  spiritual  life  which  had 
flowed  forth  from  her,  and  thus  to  bring 
the  whole  work  to  completion.  All 
being,  even  down  to  the  very  hylic  mat- 
ter that  struggles  against  all  being,  was 
capable  of  ennoblement,  each  after  its 
own  degree.  The  Soter  must,  tlierefore, 
enter  into  connection  with  all  these  stages 
of  being,  in  order  to  fashion  all,  both  the 
lower  (the  Psychical)  as  well  as  the 
higher  (the  Pneumatical,)  into  the  degree 
of  the  hisihor  life,  of  which  each  is 
capable.  Except  for  this,  according  to 
the  usual  course  of  nature,  the  Soter 
could  enter  into  connection  only  with  the 
spiritual  nature,  which  is  akin  tohim,and 
such  a  nature  could  enter  into  this  tem- 


*   Clem.  Strom.  lib.  vi.  p.  641.     [Svlb.  p.  272. 
Potter,  p.  792.    Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  128.J 


PSYCHICAL    MESSIAH. THE    TWO    UNITED. 


272 

poral  world  only  in  connection  with  a 

Valenlinus  might  here  coincide  with 
the  doctrine  of  Basilides,  only  with  this 
diflerence,  that  with  the  first  of  them,  the 
human  part  in  the  person  and  in  the  life 
of  the  Redeemer  received  a  somewhat 
higher  character,  although  not  the  right 
and  hecoming  one;  the  Christ,  composed 
and  decomposed  hy  him,  according  to  his 
own  notions,  was  always  very  different 
from  the  Idsloriccd  Christ. 

Tlie  Deniiurffos  had  promised  to  his 
own  people  a  Redeemer,  a  Messiah,  who 
would  release  them  from  the  dominion  of 
the  hylical,  introduce  the  annihilation  of 
every  thing  which  opposed  itself  to  his 
empire, — rule  over  every  thing  in  his 
name, — and  rejoice  all  that  obeyed  him 
with  all  kinds  of  earthly  happiness.  He 
sent  down  this  Messiali,  who  represented 
the  very  image  of  the  Demiurgos,  out  of 
his  own  heaven ;  but  this  elevated  Being 
could  not  enter  into  any  connection  with 
matter ;  nay,  as  it  was  to  introduce  the 
annihilation  of  every  thing  material,  how 
could  it  receive  any  thing  whatever  from 
matter .''  There  would  then  have  been 
joined  with  the  material  body  a  material 
spirit*  of  life,  akin  to  it,  and  the  source  of 
every  thing  evil ;  and  how  could  he  have 
been  the  Redeemer,  if  the  principle  of  evil 
had  been  present  in  his  own  nature  }  The 
Demiurgos  also  formed  a  body  for  the 
psychical  Messiah  out  of  the  finer  ethereal 
matter  of  heaven,  out  of  which  he  sent 
him  down  into  this  world.  This  body 
was  so  formed,  by  some  wonderful  con- 
trivance,! that  he  appeared  visibly,  and 
could  subject  himself  to  all  sensuous  ac- 
tions and  afiections,  and  yet  do  this  in  a 
manner  entirely  different  from  the  usual 
kind  of  bodies.!  But  the  miracle  of  the 
birth  of  Jesus  consisted  in  this,  that  the 
psychical  nature  which  came  down  from 
the  heaven  of  the  Demiurgos,  together 
with  the  ethereal  body  brought  from 
thence,  came  into  the  light  of  the  world 
through  the  body  of  Mary  only  as  through 
a  canal.§  But  yet  this  psychical  Messiah 
Avould  never  have  been  able  to  complete 
the  work  laid  upon  him  by  the  Demiur- 
gos :  there  was  need  of  a  higher  power 
for  the  conquest  of  the  empire  of  the  bx-n  \ 
the  Demiurgos  acted  as  well  here  as  in 
everything  as  the  unconscious  instrument 


*  The  ■\'U)(jf  dxcyc;.  "I"  'E^  owovoMWf. 

i  Se,iju!t  in  TDc  u9«i'c[/c  4"A;,""'f  oiicrioi.;. — Theodot. 
DiJascal.  Anatol. 
§  '(if  Si*  caiXJivof. 


of  the  Soter.  This  latter  had  appointed 
the  moment  in  which  he  would  unite 
himself  with  tliis  psychical  Messiah  as 
his  instrument,  in  order  to  fulfil  the  work 
which  had  been  prepared  and  promised 
by  the  Demiurgos  in  a  far  higher  sense 
than  he  himself  anticipated,  and  to  found 
a  Messianic  kingdom  of  a  far  higher  kind, 
to  the  real  circumstances  of  which  only 
the  most  elevated  predictions  of  the  pro- 
phets, and  those  not  understood  by  the 
Demiurgos  himself,  had  pointed. 

The  psychical  Messiah,  who  did  not 
perceive  the  destination  which  was  to  fall 
to  his  lot  through  his  union  with  tlie  Soter, 
in  the  mean  time  laid  before  man  the 
Ideal  of  ascetic  holiness.  He  was  able  to 
exert  an  extraordinary  dominion  over 
matter  from  the  peculiar  nature  of  his 
body.  He  let  himself  down,  indeed,  to 
man,  so  as  to  eat  and  drink ;  hut  still 
without  being  subject  to  the  same  affec- 
tions as  other  men:  he  carried  on  every 
thing  after  a  divine  manner.* 

At  the  baptism  in  the  Jordan,  where  he 
was  to  receive  his  solemn  consecration  to 
his  calling  as  the  Messiah,  from  John  the 
Baptist,  the  representative  of  the  Demi- 
urgos, the  Soter,  who  had  thus  conducted 
every  thing  through  his  invisible  guidance, 
united  himself  with  him,  descending  under 
the  symbol  of  the  dove.  On  this  ques- 
tion, whether  the  psychical  Messiah  from 
the  first  bore  a  spiritual  nature  within  ^ 
him,  which,  descending  with  the  vehicu- 
lum  of  a  soul,  was  to  develope  itself  to 
maturity  in  this  world,  that  it  might  then 
first  become  capable  of  redemption ;  or 
whether  it  was  only  at  his  descent,  into 
this  world  that  the  Soter  first  received 
from  the  Sophia  a  spiritual  nature  as  a 
veliicle,  in  order  to  be  able  to  unite  him 
self  with  the  human  nature,  and  that  also 
the  higher  pneumatical  nature  was  com- 
municated to  the  Messiah  of  the  Demi- 
urgos during  baptism  :  on  this  point  there 
might  be  a  diversity  of  opinions  even  in 
the  Valentinian  school  itself.| 

*  Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  iii.  451. 

-j-  The  latter  view  is  apparently  found  in  a  pas- 
sage of  Heracleon  ;  Origen,  t.  vi.  §  23. ;  Grabe 
Spicileg.  t.  ii.  p.  89,  where  I  once  (see  my  Gene- 
tische  Entwickelung,  &c.,  p.  149,)  erroneously 
supposed  that  I  could  recognise  the  doctrine  that 
the  Soter  himself  became  man,  and  that  of  his 
union  with  the  human  nature  from  its  first  de- 
velopment. He  explains  John  i.  27,  in  his  man- 
ner, first  justly,  according  to  the  sense  expressed 
by  the  words,  "  John  avows  that  he  is  not  worthy 
to  render  the  smallest  service  to  the  Redeemer ;" 
and  then  afterwards  he  arbitralily  introduces  a 
higher  sense  into  the  simple  words,  according  to 


THE    PASSION   NOT   THE    CHIEF   MATTER. 


2T3 


Accordinor  to  the  doctrine  of  Valen- 
tinus,  as  well  as  that  of  Basilides,  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  redeeming  Spirit  in  human 
nature,  and  its  union  with  the  psychical 
Messiah  would  be  the  chief  business  in 
the  work  of  redemption.  He  also  agreed 
with  Basilides  in  this,  that  tlie  Soter  had 
left  the  psychical  Messiah  to  himself  at 
his  passion,  but  he  ascribed  more  impor- 
tance than  Basilides  to  the  passion  of  the 
Messiah,  although  a  theosophy,  which 
sought  peculiar  mysteries  every  where, 
despised  a  simple  explanation,  and  in 
consequence  of  its  multitude  of  mystical 
and  speculative  relations  and  meanings 
would  not  allow  the  feelings  of  the  heart 
to  show  themselves  ;  although  this  theo- 
sophy was  too  contemplative  and  super- 
Iniinan  to  be  able  rightly  to  comprehend 
the  passion  of  Christ  in  its  human  and 
moral  aspect.  As  the  psychical  Messiah 
spread  himself  upon  the  cross,  and  with 
the  cross  spread  himself  over  the  lower 
Avorld,  this  was  an  image  of  that  first  act 
of  redemption  by  which  the  Soter  (see 
above,)  had  extended  himself  over  the 
Sophia  with  the  aTa.v^o(;.  Just  as  in  the 
higher  region  this  effected  the  freeing  of 
the  Sophia  from  that  which  is  foreign  to 
her,  so  also  it  effected  in  the  lower  the 
freeing  of  the  psychical  from  the  material, 
which  is  the  groundwork  of  all  that  is 
evil,  even  to   the  final  annihilation  of  it 


his  own  theosophic  ideas :  oix,  iyai  ii/ui  iKaivi;,  hm. 
ii  \ul  xxtsaSji  drrs  y.!ry^ovi  X-M  irafKt  K^ji-^, 
L;  vrr'.ixiA.A,  Trtpt  i;  sjco  \'.ycY  u7r:icuvuj  cii  iwi.fx:u, 
cuSi  Sii}-}>KTia6*t  w  imwatt  Txv  7rtf,i  airx;  eu.vo- 
/uixv-  We  can  hardly  here,  under  the  term  "  the 
Hesh,"  which  the  Soter,  who  came  down  out 
of  the  higher  region  from  the  bounds  of  the 
Pleroma  and  the  tctoc  ^«75t«toc,  had  received, 
understand  the  body  of  the  psychical  Messiah, 
forme-d  by  some  peculiar  oixovc^ui^ ;  for  he  is 
certainly  here  speaking  of  the  Soter,  who  re- 
vealed himself  to  John  at  the  baptism,  and  at  all 
events,  according  to  the  Valentinian  doctrine,  he 
did  not  unite  himself  with  the  body  but  with  the 
psychical  Messiah  who  bore  this  body.  And 
then  John,  who  here  represented  the  person  of  the 
Demiurgos  himself,  would  never  have  uttered  his 
aiStonishment  thus  at  this  wonderful  body,  formed 
by  the  latter  person  himself  (the  Demiurgos.) 
But  the  Valentinians  called  every  coveriiif^,  every 
vehicle  for  a  higher  being,  which  lets  himself  down 
into  a  lower  region,  a  o-af^.  The  Sophia  gave  a 
a-^Tt'fjft  mzjfjturiicov,  in  order  that  he  might  let  him- 
self down  to  the  earth  in  this  as  a  vehicle  for  his 
appearance,  and  might  thereby  enter  into  union 
with  the  •l^'^X"'  '^^^  opening  words  of  the  Didas- 
cal.  Anatol.  give  us  the  proof  of  this,  for  it  is  said, 
0  TTji-.i^-iKiv  7-:)fiia'A'  ^ui  Kcym  (as  well  as  to  the  Soter) 

»     3"6<f(*     TO    7rVSJJUlX.TIX,'^V  O'nflfJI.X,    TOUTO     (TTCtaO'X/UWO! 

KrLTntSa  0  triDTufi.  It  was  also  of  this  wonderful 
apparatus  that  Heracleon  spoke. 

35 


altogether,  after  it  has  become  dissolved  in 
itself.*  By  the  words,  '•'■  Into  thy  hands, 
O  Father,  I  commend  my  spirit^''''  he  com- 


mended   the 


7ri'£ff*«TiJtO»     aiTf^ixx 


which 


was  then  leaving  him,  in  order  that  it 
might  not  be  detained  in  the  dominion 
of  the  Demiurgos,  but  that  it  might  raise 
itself  up  free  into  the  higher  region,  and 
that  all  those  spiritual  natures,  whose 
representative  this  spiritual  nature  united 
with  him  was,  might  also  be  raised  up 
with  it.  The  psychical  Messiah  raises 
himself  up  to  the  Demiurgos,  who  trans- 
fers to  him  in  his  name  the  sovereign 
might  and  rule,  and  the  pneumatical 
Messiah  raises  himself  up  to  the  Soter, 
whither  all  freed  spiritual  natures  are  to 
follow  him. 

The  most  important  matter,  the  chief 
concern  for  the  pneumatical  natures  in  the 
work  of  redemption,  is  still  the  redemp- 
tion, which  was  imparted  to  human  na- 
ture by  its  union  with  the  Soter  at  the 
baptism  in  the  Jordan.  This  must  be  re- 
peated in  every  individual  case.  Valen- 
tinus  speaks  thus  of  the  sanctifying  ef- 
fects of  inward  communion  with  the 
Redeemer.  "  But  there  is  one  Good, 
(whose  free  appearance  is  the  revelation 
through  the  Son,)  and  through  Imn  alone 
can  the  heart  become  pure  after  all  evil 
spirits  have  been  banished  out  of  the 
,  heart,  for  many  spirits  inhabiting  it  will 
,;  not  allow  it  to  be  pure.  Each  one  of 
these  fully  performs  its  oAvn  work,  while 
they  defile  it  in  manifold  ways  by  un- 
seemly desires.  And  it  appears  to  me  to 
'  be  with  such  a  heart  as  with  an  inn, 
I  which  is  trampled  upon  and  trodden 
down  and  often  filled  with  dirt,  while  men 
1  dwell  within  it  without  restraint,  and  take 
no  care  whatever  about  the  place,  as  one 
I  in  which  they  have  no  concern.  Thus 
!  also  the  heart,  until  it  attains  heavenly 
grace,  remains  unclean,  as  being  the 
'  abode  of  many  evil  spirits.  But  where 
!  the  Father,  the  only  one  that  is  good,  takes 
j  possession  of  it,  then  is  it  sanctified  and 
jit  shines  with  light;  and  thus  he  who 
I  possesses  such  a  heart,  is  declared  to  be 
j  blessed  (/xaxagj^ira*)  because  he  will  see 
j  God."t 

j  He  who  is  thus  united  with  God  is 
I  already  a  member  of  the  heavenly  com- 


»  The  declaration  of  Heracleon  in  Origen,  t.  vi. 
§  23,  TM  o-rM^CD  u}/>iKu'7B:u  Kxt  ii^u.via-BAi  TrsLo-^f  rnv 
KiKtxv,  must  be  understood  in  connection  with  the 
whole  Valentinian  system. 

t  Strom,  lib.  ii.,  p.  409.  [Ed.  Par.  1629.] 
[Sylburg,  p.  176.  Potter,  p.  488—9.  Klotz,  vol. 
ii.  p.  191.] 


PNEUMATICAL    AND    PSYCHICAL. 


274 


munity,  is  already  incorporated  by  the 
power  of  the  Redeemer  into  the  host  of 
blessed  spirits,  which  is  thus  expressed  in 
the  language  of  the  Valentinian  school: 
"■  As  every  pneumatical  soul  has  its  other 
half  in  the  higher  world  of  Spirits  (the 
angel  which  belongs  to  it)  for  union  with 
which  it  is  destined,  so  does  it  receive 
through  the  Soter  the  power  to  enter  at 
once  into  this  syzygy  in  regard  to  its 
spiritual  life."* 

As  the  psychical  and  pneumatical  be- 
ings are  difierent  from  one  another  in 
their  nature  and  their  destination,  so 
they  remain  different  also  in  Christianity. 
There  is  a  j^gto-r»ancr^ot  -^vyjuioi;  and  a 
^ptaTtuvis'fjLai  7r»£f/xaTi)to{.  St.  I  aul  de- 
clares to  the  psychical,  that  for  them  he 
has  known  nothing  and  could  preach 
nothing  but  Christ  crucified  ;t  that  he 
could  not  preach  to  them  that  wisdom  of 
the  perfect  which  is  hidden  even  to  the 
Demiurgos  and  his  angels.  Tiie  Valen- 
tinians  distinguish  also,  according  to  their 
system,  a  twofold  signification  of  redemp- 
tion and  of  baptism,  in  regard  to  the  psy- 
chici  and  the  pneumatici.  The  psychici 
must  be  led  to  believe  by  means  of  mira- 
cles and  other  acts  that  strike  the  senses  ;J 
they  are  only  capable  of  a  belief  ujwn 
authority^  and  not  capable  of  a  pcrsuasio7i 
which  proceeds  from  the  inward  essence 
of  truths  nor  of  the  intuitive  perception 
(anschauung)  of  truth  itself  To  such 
men  Ciirist  speaks  in  John  iv.  48.  The 
spiritual  men,  on  the  contrary,  need  no 
such  outward  means  of  instruction  :  in 
virtue  of  their  kindred  nature  they  are  at- 
tracted by  truth  itself  without  any  inter- 
mediate nieans.§  When  truth  reveals  it- 
self to  them,  there  follows  instantly  in 
them  a  confident  belief,  such  as  could 
not  be  effected  from  without,  and  could 
only  proceed  from  the  immediate  influ- 
ence of  truth  upon  their  kindred  spiritual 
nature.ll  Their  worsliip  of  God  founded 
on  tlieir  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  the 
true  "reasonable  service  of  God." 

That  seed  of  the  spiritual  nature  is  that 
by  which  men  are  attracted   by  the  Re- 


1  deemer,  and  led  to  him,  the  men  of  the 
Spirit ;  therefore,  tliey  who  possess  that 
I  seed  are  the  salt  and  the  soul  of  the  out- 
ward Church,  those  through  whom  Chris- 
I  tianity  is  farther  propagated  as  the  forming 
[principle  of  human  nature.*  By  these 
spiritual  men  the  illumination  of  all  this 
j  earthly  universe,  the  final  annihilation  of 
all  that  is  material  and  evil,  is  to  be  pre- 
j  pared,  after  matter  has  been  deprived  of 
all  the  life  which  it  has  seized  upon  for 
!  itself.  Valentinus  thus  addresses  these 
'pretended  spiritual  men:  "Ye  are,  from 
I  the  beginning,  immortal,  and  children  of 
[  eternal  life,  and  ye  have  been  desirous  to 
!  divide  death  among  yourselves,|  in  order 
that  ye  may  exhaust  and  expend  it,  and 
that  death  may  die  in  you  and  through 
you ;  for  when  ye  dissolve  the  world, 
(prepare  the  dissolution  of  the  material 
[  v/orld,)  but  ye  yourselves  will  not  be 
I  dissolved,  ye  are  lords  over  the  crea- 
tion, and  over  all  that  is  corruptible.";|; 
I  Although  at  the  bottom  of  these  high- 
sounding  words,  as  far  as  they  were  ap- 
plied to  the  calling  of  Christians,  as 
instruments  for  the  revelation  and  exten- 
sion of  God's  kingdom,  there  is  some- 
thing of  truth ;  yet  this  truth  is  here 
mixed  with  a  pride,  which  in  the  case  of 
certain  peculiarities,  might  easily  intro- 
duce the  most  mischievous  excesses  of 
fanaticism.  If  the  Valentinians  had  been 
able  to  found  a  Church  according  to  their 
own  notions,  the  Pneumatici  would  have 
been  the  Christian  Brahmins. 

Now,  when  the  end  prepared  by  these 
spiritual  men  should  have  been  attained, 
then,  after  the  dissolution  of  the  whole 
material  world,  the  Soter,  united  into  a 
syzygy  with  the  Sophia,  and  under  him 
the  matured  spiritual  natures  in  pairs 
with  the  angels,  were  to  enter  into  the 
Pleroma,  and  the  last  (lowest)  stage  of 
the  spiritual  \vorld§  was  to  receive  the 
psychici  under  the  Demiurgos;  and  they 
also  were  to  receive  that  measure  of  hap- 
piness, which  was  suited  to  their  peculiar 
nature.     The  Demiurgos  rejoices  himself 


*   Heracleon,  ap.  Origen,t.  13,  §  l],  x.c/uii^i^u 

7TA^  ctUTiU  TUV  Sul^ fjltV  X.il  Itll  lyOXTtt  H3t  TKV  dvax^iaiv 
TT^Ot  TO   Try^H^UtfAX  ctUTK. 

■(-  Diilnscal.  Anatol.  Of  a  twofold  mode  of 
preaching  of  St.  Paul.  In  regard  to  the  Psychici, 
iKupv^i  Tcy  <rft)T)if «  ytvif'Tiy  kji  Tra&tiny. 

i    At   ie^-^aiv  i^uo-iv  s;^;(;vT4■  kji  St   ata-6n<rtre-  ■ 
Kcucv^i  Ao>«  TTto-Tiuiv.     Orig.  f.  xiii  §  .59. 

§  Heracleon  in  Joann.  t.  xiii.  c.  20,  the  Siktpoi 
faixc  JtxdiTtc. 

J   'H  lJiuk^ith  k-u  tcxTcUJoiKc;  th  <f«int. 


*  See  the  proof  of  this  in  Heracleon,  to  be 
given  almost  immediately. 

I  While  they  were  sent  down  into  the  midst 
of  the  material  world. 

i  Strom,  lib.  iv.  p.  509.  B.  [Ed.  Pari?,  1629.] 
'Aw'  '^X"'  '■6'-'»*T(u  io-Ti  K1J  Twcx  ^ainr  sfTTe  diiaivn.;. 
K*/  Tiy  BauXTcv  /flsAfTS  /Ai?tT*ab-u  th  iavnu;  lyx 
JrtTTxyiia-nri  ou/tcv  k-u  .  MXayrMtt  k-u  .  rrS^yy  o  BxyxTCi 
h  CfAtv  K-u  it  v/JCfty.      'OT-av  y^  Tcy  juty  k  cr/mcy  MxTt, 

CfJ.U:    Si   ftM    KtT(t\U>lirSt,  KU^IfOiTt   Tur  nrKTlai^    Ktt   TOC 

'fQopxr  avicnig.  lSylb.p.218.  Potter, p.603.  Klotz, 
vol.  ii.  p.  326.] 

§  The  Tcwftf  /Mjj-oTjrref. 


ALLEGORICAL    INTERPRETATIONS. 


in  the  appearance  of  the  Soter,  through 
wliich  a  hi<fher  world,  to  which  he  had 
hitherto  been  a  stranger,  is  revealed  to 
him,  and  through  wliich  also  he,  being 
freed  from  his  harassmg  service,  is  enabled 
to  enter  into  rest,  and  receive  an  echo  of 
the  glory  of  the  Pleronia.  He  is  the 
friend  of  the  Bridegroom  (the  Soter)  who 
stands  there  and  belongs  to  him,  and  de- 
lights himself  in  the  voice  of  the  bride- 
groom, and  delights  himself  in  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  marriage.*  John  the  Baptist 
spoke  those  words,  John  iii.  29,  as  the 
representative  of  the  Demiurgos. 

<j  Distinguished  Men  (f  the  School  of 
Valentinus. 

Among  the  men  of  the  Valentinian 
school,  the  Alexandrian  Heracleon  is  dis- 
tinguished by  more  learning  and  pro- 
foundness than  the  others.  He  composed 
a  commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
from  which  Origenf  has  preserved  some 
fragments  of  importance,  perliaps  also  a 
commentary  on  that  of  St.  Luke,  from 
which  (if  such  be  the  case,)  Clement  of 
Alexandria^  has  handed  down  to  us  a 
fragment, — the  explanation  of  Luke  xii. 
8.  It  is  easy  to  understand  that  the  deep 
and  inward  spirit  of  St.  John's  writings 
would  be  attractive  to  the  Gnostics. 
Heracleon  brought  to  the  explanation 
of  this  Gospel  a  deep  religious  feeling 
directed  to  interior  things,  together  with 
an  understanding  which  was  clear,  when- 
ever he  was  not  led  into  error  by  theo- 
sophical  speculations ;  but  that  which 
was  wanting  in  him  was  a  feeling  for  the 
simplicity  of  St.  John,  and  a  knowledge 
or  a  recognition  of  the  principles  of 
grammatical  and  logical  interpretation  in 
general,  without  which  free  room  is  given 
to  every  caprice,  even  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Scriptural  writers,  inasmuch 
as  they,  as  men,  although  inspired  men, 
obeyed  the  laws  which  regulate  the  modes 
of  speech  and  thought  among  men.  Al- 
though as  far  as  we  can  see,  Heracleon 
intended  honestly  to  deduce  his  tlieology 
oLt  of  St.  John,  yet  he  was  altogether 
taken  possession  of  by  his  own  csystem, 
and  so  thoroughly  entangled  in  it  in  all 
his  modes  of  thought  and  conception, 
that  he  could  not  stir  a  step  free  from  it, 


•  The  union  of  the  Soter  with  the  Sophia,  and 
of  the  angels  with  the  spiritual  natures  in  the 
Pleroina. 

f  In  his  Tomi  upon  John,  in  which  he  fre- 
quently refers  to  the  explanations  of  Heracleon. 

I  Strom,  iv.  503.  [Sylliuri;,  p.  215.  Potter, 
p.  593-6.    Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  316-8.] 


275 

I  and  involuntarily  introduced  its  views 
and  ideas  into  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which 
he  considered  as  the  source  of  divine 
truth.  As  a  proof  of  what  is  here  said, 
we  will  take  a  closer  view  of  Heracleon's 
explanation  of  the  glorious  conversation 
of  our  Saviour  with  the  woman  of  Sa- 
I  maria.  He  could  not  stand  by  the  simple 
j  historical  narrative,  nor  content  himself 
j  with  the  profound,  psychological  con- 
'  sideration  of  thi.s  Samaritan  woman  in  her 
relation  to  the  Saviour.  Immediately  in 
this  Samaritan  woman,  who  was  attracted 
by  the  words  and  the  appearance  of 
Christ,  an  image  is  presented  to  his  mind 
of  ail  spiritual  natures,  which  are  attracted 
by  that  which  is  divine ;  and,  therefore, 
in  this  narrative  the  whole  relation  of  the 
Tcvtvix-ccrixoi  to  the  Soter,  and  to  the  higher 
spiritual  world,  must  be  represented.  And 
therefore,  the  words  of  the  Samaritan 
woman  must  bear  a  double  sense  ;  one,  a 
sense  of  which  she  herself  was  conscious, 
and  the  other  that  higher  sense,  which 
she  uttered  as  the  representative  of  the 
whole  class  of  wntiftaTtxo*,  without  being 
conscious  of  it ;  and  therefore,  the  words 
of  the  Saviour  in  reference  to  these 
things  must  also  bear  a  twofold  sense,  a 
higher  and  a  lower,  a  notion  which  in- 
volves the  unnatural  supposition  of  a 
double  conversation  going  on  at  the  same 
time.  And  yet  he  had  seized  upon  the 
fundamental  idea  of  the  words  of  the 
Redeemer  in  a  very  understanding  spirit, 
if  he  could  only  have  prevented  himself 
from  being  drawn  away  from  the  main 
matter  by  seeking  too  much  in  subordi- 
nate particulars.  He  explains  justly  the 
words  of  Christ,  (John  iv.  10,  13,  14,) 
which  are  to  be  understood  spiritually:* 
"  The  water  which  the  Saviour  gives,  is 

from  his  spirit  and  his  power 

His  grace  and  his  gift  are  something  which 
can  never  be  taken  away,  nor  corrupted, 
nor  consume  away  in  him  who  partakes 

of  it They  who  receive  that 

which  is  abundantly  given  to  them  from 
above,  themselves  also  let  that  which  is 
given  to  them  bubble  over  for  the  eternal 
life  of  others."  But  then  he  draws  the 
false  conclusion,  that  because  Christ 
meant  the  water  which  he  wished  to 
give,  to  be  taken  in  a  symbolical  sense, 
consequently  also  the  water  of  the  well 
of  Jacob  must  be  understood  in  a 
symbolical  sense.  It  was  to  be  a  sym- 
bol of  Judaism,  which  satisfies  not  the 


*    [This  passatjc  is  quoted.  Grab.  Spicileg.  vol. 
ii.  p.  94-5.— H.  J.  R.] 


2T6 


VIEWS    OF   MARTYRDOM. 


desires  of  the  spiritual  nature,  and  of  its 
perishable  earthly  glory.  When  the  Sa- 
maritan woman  says,  "  Give  me  this 
water,  that  I  may  not  thirst,  that  I  may 
not  come  hither  to  draw  •,"  then  the  bur- 
densoineness  of  Judaism  was  to  be  be- 
tokened by  this,  the  difficulty  of  finding 
in  it  (Judaism)  the  nourishment  of  the 
inward  life,  and  its  unsatisfactoriness.* 
When  the  Redeemer  desired  the  woman 
to  call  her  husband,  he  meant  her  other 
half  in  the  world  of  spirits,  the  angel 
which  belonged  to  her,  in  order  that  she, 
coming  with  him  to  the  Saviour,  might 
receive  power  from  him  to  bind  herself 
with  this  her  other  half,  and  thus  unite 
with  him.f  The  ground  for  this  arbitrary 
interpretation  was  this :  "  He  could  not 
speak  of  her  earthly  husband,  because  he 
was  well  aware  that  she  had  no  lawful 
husband.  .  .   .  According  to  the  spiritual 


fession  before  the  civil  power  to  be  the 
only  thing  :  but  this  is  wrong,  for  even 
the  hypocrite  niiglit  make  this  confession. 
This  is  a  particular  confession ;  it  is  not 
the  common  confession,  which  ought  to 
be  made  by  all  Christians,  of  which  he  is 
here  speaking;  it  is  the  confession  through 
works  and  conduct,  which  answer  to  a 
belief  in  him.*  This  common  confession 
is  followed  by  that  peculiar  one,  if  it  be 

needful,  and  if  reason  enjoins  it 

Those  persons  who  confess  him  with 
their  mouth,  may  deny  him  through  their 
works.  Those  only  can  truly  confess 
him,  who  live  in  the  confession  of  him, 
among  whom  he  himself  confesses,  be- 
cause he  has  received  them  into  himself, 
and  they  have  received  him  into  them- 
selves.! Therefore  can  he  never  deny 
himself'J 

W^e  next  make  mention  of  Ptolem.cus, 


meaningl;  the  Samaritan   woman  did  not  I  who  to  judge  from  the  work  of  Irenreus, 


know  her  husband ;  she  knew  nothing 
of  the  angel,  that  belonged  to  her :  ac- 
cording to  the  literal  meaning,§  she  was 
ashamed  to  say  that  she  was  living  in  an 
unlawful  connection."  Heracleon  further 
concluded,  that  as  the  water  is  the  sym- 
bol of  the  divine  life  bestowed  by  the 
Redeemer,  so  is  the  pitcher  a  symbol  of 
the  capacity  in  the  disposition  of  the  Sa- 
marit  an  woman  for  this  Divine  life.  She 
left  the  pitcher  behind  with  him ;  that  is 
to  say,  as  she  had  such  a  vessel  with  the 
Saviour,  as  was  fitted  to  receive  the  living 
water,  she  returned  into  the  world,  in 
order  to  announce  the  coming  of  Christ 
to  the  psychical.il 

Heracleon  properly  opposed  the  habit 
of  prizing  martyrdom  as  an  opus  operatum. 
"  The  multitude,"  he  says,t  "  hold  con- 


(which  was  specially  levelled  against  the 
party  of  this  man^)  must  have  laboured 
much  for  the  propagation  of  Vafentinian 
principles.  One  is  led  to  inquire  whether 
it  be  true,  as  TertuUian  asserts,§  that 
Ptolemaeus  was  distinguished  from  Yalen- 
tinus,  because  he  imagined  the  ^ons 
rather  under  the  form  of  Hypostases, 
while  Valentinus  conceived  them  to  be 
powers  in-dwelling  in  the  being  of  God  \ 
or  at  least  one  inquires,  whether  this  dif- 
ference was  of  so  much  importance ;  be- 
cause, in  fact,  the  representation  of  the 
iEons  by  the  Gnostics,  far  from  being 
mere  abstract  notions  of  attributes,  always 
must  have  bordered  on  hypostasizing. 

A  very  important  piece  of  Ptolem?eus, 
which  has  been  preserved — his  letter  to 
one  Flora,  whom  he  endeavoured  to  gain 
over  to  the  Valentinian  principles|| — shows 
that  he  was  extremely  skilful  in  present- 
ing his  views  to  others  in  a  manner  likely 
to  recommend  them.  As  he  was  appa- 
rently writing  to  a  Christian  lady  of  the 
^,  ,  ,  ^  ,^  ,  .  ,  ,  Catholic  Church,  he  had  particularly  to 
II  The  thought  of  Heracleon  ,s  here  a  just  one,,  j  ohjcclion,  which  she  would 
that  only  he  who  IS  in  union  with  the  Saviour  by  I  ,  ,  -'  v  •  ?  i- 
his  feelings  can  preach  him  properly  to  others,-  [  '"a^e  on  the  contradiction  between  his 
although  this  just  thought  is  introduced  into  this  [  doctrines  and  those  of  the  Church,  and 
place  by  an  arbitrary  interpretation  of  that  which  j 


*  To    iVlfAO^&OV,  IteU    SuTTTOfltO-'TCiV    Kill 

"[  To  TrKii^uy.^  ttint^.     See  above. 

^  KtfTSt    TO    VOrMfAitai. 

(j  K«Ta    TO    aTTKCUV, 


historical.  We  must  here  do  Heracleon  the 
justice  to  acknowledge,  that  Origen,  here  as  well 
as  in  many  other  places,  attacks  him  unjustly,  as 
if  he  contradicted  himself;  "  for  how  could  the 
Samaritan,"  says  he,  "  preach  to  others,  when  she 
had  left  behind  her,  with  the  Redeemer,  from  whom 
she  departed,  her  organ  for  the  reception  of  the 
Divine  lifel"  But  Heracleon  was  here  quite  con- 
sistent in  his  application  of  the  allegory ;  he  did 
not  think  of  any  local  leaving  beldiid. 

^  In  the  fragment  of  his  Commentary  on  St. 
Luke,  quoted  above. 


*  Here  again,  what  Heracleon  says  is  in  itself 
quite  just ;  and  yet  his  explanation,  which  has  no 
reference  whatever  to  the  context,  is  quite  false. 

"t"  'Ev6/\))jMjMSvoc  airov;  nm  i^c/uivoi  utto  Tcinav. 

i  Which  would  necessarily  happen,  if  those 
who  are  in  connection  with  him  were  to  deny  him. 

§  Nominibus  et  numeris  .(Eonum  distinctis  in 
personales  substantias,  quas  Valentinus  in  ipsa 
summa  divinitatis,  ut  scnsus  et  aflcctus  et  motus, 
incluserat.     Adv.  Valentinian.  c.  4. 

II  Epiphan.  Hares,  ixxiii.  §.3. 


PRINCIPLES    OF   PTOLEM.EUS. 


277 


against  the  supposition  that  the  Old  Tes- 
tament and  the  creation  of  the  worlds  did 
not  proceed  from  the  Supreme  God.  In 
regard  lo  the  first,  he  appeals  to  an  apos- 
tolical tradition,  which  had  come  down  to 
him  through  a  series  of  hands,  as  well  as  to 
the  ivords  of  our  Saviour.,  according  to 
which  men  must  determine  every  thing.  By 
tradition  he  probably  means  an  Esoteric 
tradition,  which  he,  being  self -deceived, 
doubdess  deduced  from  some  pretended 
disciple  of  the  apostles;  and  as  to  the 
words  of  our  Saviour,  he  could  easily 
bring  them  into  accordance  with  his  own 
system  by  the  Gnostic  exegesis.  In  re- 
gard to  the  second  point,  we  may  well 
conceive  that  he  has  represented  his  prin- 
ciples under  the  mildest  possible  form,  in 
order  to  obtain  acceptance  for  them  with 
one  who  was  uninitiated ;  but  still  we 
lind  in  his  conclusions  nothing  which 
contradicts  the  Valentinian  principles.  He 
combats  two  opposite  errors,  the  error  of 
those  who  held  that  the  creation  of  the 
world,  and  the  Old  Testament,  were  the 
work  of  an  evil  Being,  and  the  error  of 
those  who  attributed  them  to  the  Supreme 
God ;  in  his  opinion,  the  one  party  was 
in  error,  because  it  knew  only  the  Demi- 
urgos,  and  not  the  Universal  Father., 
whom  Christ,  who  alone  knew  him,  had 
been  the  first  to  reveal :  the  other,  because 
it  knew  nothing  of  an  intermediate  Being, 
like  the  Demiurgos.  Ptolemaeus,  also, 
would  probably  say, — the  first  view  is 
that  of  men,  who  remain  Jews  even  in 
Christianity  ;  the  other  that  of  men,  who, 
without  any  intermediate  state  of  transi- 
tion from  the  service  of  Matter  and  Satan, 
in  heathenism,  had  attained  at  once  to  the 
recognition  and  knowledge  of  the  Su- 
preme God ;  and  who  believed,  because 
they  had  made  this  sudden  spring  in  their 
religion  and  knowledge,  that  a  similar 
sudden  transition  took  place  in  nature. 
"  How  can  a  law,"  he  justly  inquires, 
"  which  forbids  all  evil,  proceed  from  an 
evil  Being,  who  wars  against  all  mo- 
rality .^"  And  he  adds, "  They  who  do  not 
recognise  the  providence  of  the  Creator 
in  the  world,  must  be  blind  not  only  in 
the  eyes  of  the  soul,  but  even  in  those  of 
the  body." 

He  throws  the  Mosaic  religious  code 
into  a  threefold  division  : — 

1.    That   whicii    proceeds    from   the 
Demiurgos ; 

2.  That  wliich  Moses  settled  after  the 
dictates  of  his  own  unassisted  reason  :* 


•   This  distinction  of  diflerpnt  agents  (factors) 
who  worked  together  in  the  composition  of  the 


3.  The  oldest  additions  to  the  Mosaic 
law.* 

The  Saviour  clearly  distinguishes  the 
law  of  Moses  from  the  law  of  God  (i.  e. 
of  the  Demiurgos,)  in  Matt.  xix.  6,  Sac. 
He,  however,  exculpates  Moses  again,  and 
seeks  to  show,  that  he  gave  way  to  the 
weakness  of  the  \>eoy)\e  only  when  forced, 
in  order  to  avoid  a  greater  evil.  That 
wliich  proceeded  from  the  Demiurgos  he 
divided  again  into  a  threefold  division  ; 

1.  The  purely  moral  enactments,  dis- 
turbed by  nothing  extraneous,  which  are 
properly  called  "  The  Law,"  in  reference 
to  which,  our  Saviour  says  that  he  is 
not  come  to  destroy  the  Law,  but  to 
fulfil  it ;  for  as  it  contained  nothing  alien 
to  the  nature  of  the  Saviour,  it  required 
only  fulfilment ;  as,  for  instance,  the  com- 
mandments. Thou  shalt  do  no  murder, — 
Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery, — were 
fulfilled  in  the  commands  neither  to  be 
angry,  nor  to  lust. 

2.  The  law,  disturbed  by  the  intermix- 
ture of  evil,  as  that  part,  which  permits 
of  revenge,  Levit.  xxiv.  20 -,  xx.  9 :  "He 
who  recompenses  evil  for  evil,  does  no 
less  evil,  because  he  repeats  the  same 
conduct,  but  in  a  difTerent  order." 

The  Gnostic  has  here  only  one  measure 
for  all  cases ;  he  could  not  discover  the 
distinction  of  the  politico-juridical  from 
the  purely  moral,  nor  the  necessary  connec- 
tion between  the  two,  from  the  very  nature 
of  the  economy  of  the  Old  Testament. 
And  yet  he  recognises  here,  as  well  as  in 
Moses,  an  element  of  instruction.  "This 
command,"  says  he,  "  was,  and  remains 
still,  in  other  respects  a  just  one,  given  on 
account  of  the  weakness  of  those  who 
receive  the  Law,  though  it  transgresses 
the  pure  Laio  ;  but  it  is  foreign  to  the 
nature  and  goodness  of  the  Father  of  all, 
perhaps  not  consonant  to  the  nature  even 
of  the  Demiurgos,t  but  probably  only 
forced  upon  him ;  for  while  he  who  for- 
bade one  murder,  commanded  a  second, 
he  suffered  himself  to  be  surprised  by  ne- 
cessity, without  being  aware  of  it."  He 
means  to  say,  that  the  Demiurgos  was 
wanting,  not  in  the  will,  but  in  the  power, 
to  overcome  evd ;  and  this  part  of  the 
Law  is  entirely  abolished  by  the  Saviour, 

Holy  Scriptures,  is  quite  conformable  to  the  Valen- 
tinian notion  of  Inspiration. 

*  According  to  the  theory  of  the  Clementine, 
viz,  that  when  the  fiuw  was  written  down  from 
the  oral  tradition  of  it,  many  foreign  additions 
were  mingleil  with  the  oldest  part  of  it. 

j  I  have  translat«d  after  an  emendation  of  the 
text,  1.  c.  c.  3,  which  I  consider  necessary :  iacec 
dlii  Toxrtu,  or  m  tcwtcw  jciraxAJiAov. 

2A 


278 


TYPES. MARCOS. 


as  contrary  to  the  nature  of  the  Supreme 
God. 

3.  The  typical  ceremonial  Law,  which 
(see  above)  contains  the  type  of  the  higher 
spiritual  things,  the  Law  of  Sacrifices,  of 
Circumcision,  of  the  Sabbath,  of  the  Pass- 
over, and  of  Fasts.  "  All  this,  which  was 
merely  type  and  symbol,  was  changed 
after  the  truth  had  appeared.  The  sen- 
suous and  outward  observance  is  removed, 
but  it  is  transferred  to  the  spiritual :  the 
names  remain  the  same,  but  the  things 
are  changed.  For  the  Saviour  has  com- 
manded us  also  to  offer  sacrifices ;  but 
not  sacrifices  by  means  of  irrational  ani- 
mals, nor  such  incense,  but  through 
spiritual  praise  and  thanksgiving,  and 
through  charity,  and  doing  good  to  our 
neighbour.  He  wills  also,  that  we  should 
be  circumcised  ;  not,  however,  by  the  cir- 
cumcision of  the  foreskin  of  the  body,  but 
the  spiritual  circumcision  of  the  heart. 
He  wills  also,  that  we  should  observe  the 
Sabbath,  because  he  wishes  us  to  rest 
from  doing  evil.  Also,  that  we  should 
fast;  but  not  with  a  bodily  fast,  but  a 
spiritual,  in  which  abstinence  from  all 
evil  consists.  Our  people,  however,  do 
observe  the  external  fast,  because  it  may 
be  of  some  service  even  to  the  soul,  if 
reasonably  used,  and  neither  used  in  imi- 
tation of  any  one,  nor  out  of  habit,  nor  on 
some  particular  day,  as  if  some  one  day 
were  appointed  for  that  purpose,^ — but 
where  it  is  used  also  with  remembrance 
of  the  real  fast,  that  those  who  are  unable 
to  keep  that  fast,  may  be  reminded  of  it 
by  outward  fasting."  And  yet  what  true 
insight  into  the  spirit  of  the  system  of 
religion  proposed  in  the  New  Testament; 
what  tlioughtfulness  and  mildness  of 
judgment  does  he  show  here ! 

Marcus    and    Bardesanes*   are    distin 


*  We  can  only  mention  Secundus  in  a  cursory 
manner;  for  the  only  thing  worth  remarking  about 
him  is  his  modification  of  the  ideas  of  Valcntinus, 
l)y  which  he  made  a  distinction  in  the  first  ogdoad 
between  a  tst^«c  it^in  and  a  Tng^rtf  opi^ripx,  naming 
the  first,  l'f!;/it,  and  the  second,  darkness:  this 
is  remarkable,  because  it  shows  that,  like  most 
mystics,  in  the  pride  of  his  speculation  he  placed 
tilt  (>ris;inal  foundation,  of  evil  in  God,  while  he 
elevated  God  above  the  opposition  of  good  and 
evil,  but  supposed  that  the  seed  of  the  division 
took  its  rise  when  the  development  of  life  began  to 
proceed  from  God.  Iren.TUs,  !.  i.  c.  1 1.  §  2.  A 
similar  view  is  found  with  those  magi  among  the 
Parses,  who  taught,  after  Scharistani,  that  "  Yez- 
dan  cogitasse  secum  ;  nisi  fucrint  mihi  controver- 
Hi;B,  quomodo  erit  1  Hancque  cogitatioiiem  pra- 
vam,  naturaj  lucis  minus  analogam,  j)roduxisse 
tencbras,  dictas  Ahriman."  (Hyde,  Hist.  Relig. 
Vet.  Pers.  p.  295.) 


guished  persons  among  those  who  are 
called  the  disciples  of  Valentinus ;  we 
say,  "•  who  are  called  the  disciples,''''  be- 
cause it  would  probably  be  more  correct 
to  state  that  both  of  them  drew  from  the 
same  sources  in  Syria,  the  native  land  of 
Gnosticism,  which  Valentinus  had  used. 
Marcus  apparently  came  from  Palestine 
in  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century. 
His  coming  from  Palestine  appears  pro- 
bable, from  the  aramaic  liturgical  formulre, 
of  which  he  made  use.  While  in  an 
Heracleon  and  a  Ptolemseus  the  Alexan- 
drian style  of  knojvledge  and  learning 
formed  rather  the  characteristic  of  their 
theosophy,  so  on  the  contrary,  in  Marcus 
the  poetic  and  symbolic  was  the  prevailing 
character.  He  brought  forward  his  doc- 
trines in  a  poenij  in  Avhich  he  introduced 
the  iEons  speaking  in  liturgical  formula, 
and  in  imposing  symbols  of  worship. 
(We  sliall  hereafter  introduce  specimens 
of  these  latter.)  After  the  Jewish  caba- 
listic method,  he  hunted  after  mysteries 
in  the  number  and  the  position  of  letters. 
The  idea  of  a  Xoyoi  rov  oi'to?,  of  a  word  as 
the  revelation  of  the  hidden  Divine  Being 
in  creation,  was  spun  out  by  him  with 
the  greatest  subtilty ;  he  made  the  whole 
creation  a  progressive  expression  of  the 
inexpressible.*  As  the  divine  seeds  of 
life,|  which  lie  enclosed  in  the  jEons,  con- 
tinually unfold  themselves  wider  and  in- 
dividualize themselves,  this  represents, 
that  these  names  of  tlie  unnameable  being 
divide  themselves  into  their  separate 
sounds.  An  echo  of  the  Pleroma  falls 
down  into  the  i;^»),  and  becomes  the 
formative  principle  of  a  new  inferior  crea- 


*   To  appDTcy  puTci  ytniBwui. 

•j"    The  tT-TrlpudTA  TrVlUfAiTIKH. 

i  In  general,  it  is  a  peculiarly  Gnostic  idea,  to 
conceive  that  the  hidden  Divinity  expressed  him- 
self aloud  till  it  was  re-echoed,  and  died  away, 
and  then  again  that  the  echo  fashioned  itself  into  a 
clear  note  [or  /one,  ton]  and  into  a  clear  lourd, 
for  the  revelation  of  the  Divinity  ;  and  this  idea 
they  could  apply  under  a  variety  of  different  rela- 
tions. Thus  Heracleon  says.  The  Saviour  is  the 
Word,  as  the  revelation  of  the  Divinity,  all  the 
body  of  prophecy,  which  predicted  him,  without 
being  justly  aware  of  the  idea  of  the  Messiah,  in 
its  spiritual  sense  was  only  one  note  [ton,]  which 
preceded  the  revealing  word :  John  the  Baptist, 
standing  in  the  middle  between  the  economy  of 
the  Old  and  of  the  New  Testament,  is  the  i^oice 
[or  tone,  sfimiuc,]  which  is  akin  to  the  word,  as 
the  word  expre.sses  thoughts,  with  a  consciousness 
of  their  meaning.  The  voice  [stimme,  voice,  note, 
or  tune,]  becomes  a  word,  when  John  becomes  the 
disciple  of  Christ,  and  the  note  [or  sound,  ton]  be- 
comea  a  voice  [stimme]  when  the  prophets  of  the 


BARDESANES. — FATE. — MORAL  FREEDOM. 


279 


The  second  of  these,  Bardesanes,  who 
is  still  less  to  be  reckoned  as  a  proper 
disciple  of  Valentinus,  lived  at  Edessa  in 
Mesopotamia,  as  we  learn  from  his  name, 
"  the  son  of  Daisan,''  derived  from  a  river 
of  tliis  name  in  the  town  of  Edessa:  he 
made  himself  known  by  his  extensive 
learning;  many  among  the  older  writings 
give  notices  of  changes  in  the  system  of 
Bardesanes.  According  to  the  account 
of  Eusebius,  he  was  at  first  devoted  to 
the  system  of  Valentinus;  but  when  he 
had  seen,  after  accurate  inquiry,  how  un- 
tenable much  of  it  was,  he  went  over  to 
the  orthodox  Church ;  and  yet  at  the  same 
time  retained  much  of  his  old  doctrines,  so 
that  he  became  the  founder  of  a  peculiar 
sect.  According  to  Epiphanius  he  went 
over  from  the  orthodox  Church  to  the 
Valentinians.  But  Ephraim  Syrus,  the 
learned  Syrian  writer,  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, who  lived  in  the  land  of  Bardesanes, 
and  wrote  in  his  language,  and  who  had 
read  his  writings,  gives  us  absolutely  no 
notice  whatever  of  these  changes  in  the 
doctrinal  notions  of  Bardesanes,  and  it  is 
easv  enough  to  explain  how  those  false 
reports  arose.  Bardesanes,  when  he  spoke 
publicly  in  the  Church,  like  the  rest  of 
the  Gnostics  (see  above,)  made  the  pre- 
vailing doctrinal  notions  his  starting 
point:  he  let  himself  down  after  his  own 
fashion  to  the  capacities  of  the  psychici. 
On  many  single  points  he  really  coincided 
with  those  notions  more  than  other  Gnos- 
tics, and  he  might  also,  from  sincere  con- 
viction, unite  against  many  other  Gnostic  ! 
sects,  at  that  time  prevailing  in  Syria,  as 
against  those  who  denied  the  connection 
between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament, 
or  those  who  derived  the  visible  world 
from  an  evil  being,  or  those  who  held 
the  doctrine  of  fate  to  the  prejudice  of 
moral  freedom;  just  as  the  Gnostic  Ptole- 
nifEus  (see  above)  notwithstanding  his 
Gnosticism,  had  also  written  against  such 
people. 

It  was  in  entire  accordance  with  the 
Valentinian  system,  that  Bardesanes  ac- 
knowledged something  in  the  nature  of 
man,  incomprehensible  to  itself,  and  ele- 


vated above  the  whole  world,  in  which 
the  temporal  consciousness  of  man  de- 
velopes  itself;  the  human  soul  being  a  seed 
shed  abroad  from  out  of  the  Pleroma ;  its 
I  essence  and  its  powers,  which  are  derived 
from  higher  regions,  remain,  therefore, 
hidden  even  from  itself,  until  it  shall  have 
arrived  at  a  full  consciousness  and  use  of 
them  in  the  Pleroma.*  This,  however, 
according  to  the  Gnostic  system,  could 
only  be  true  about  the  spiritual  natures  ; 
but  according  to  that  system  he  must 
have  ascribed  to  the  psychici  also,  a  moral 
freedom,  elevated  above  the  power  of  the 
influences  of  nature,  or  the  power  of  the 
vXi).  He,  therefore,  although  like  many 
of  those  inclined  to  Gnosticism,  he  busied 
himself  with  astrology,  contended  against 
the  doctrine  of  such  an  influence  of  the 
stars  (an  sJ/Lta^fitu))  as  should  be  supposed 
to  settle  the  life  and  affairs  of  man  by 
necessity.     Eusebius  in  his  great  literary 

treasure-house,  the    Trpovcc^otcT-nevri   evccyye- 

Aix*},  has  preserved  a  large  fragment  of 
this  remarkable  work;  he  here  introduces 
among  other  things  the  Christians  dis- 
persed over  so  many  countries,!  as  an 
example  of  the  absurdity  of  supposing 
that  the  stars  irresistibly  influence  the 
character  of  a  people.  "  Where  they  are^'' 
he  says  of  the  Christians,  "  they  are  nei- 
ther overcome  by  abominable  laws  and 
customs,  nor  does  dieir  nativity,  deduced 
from  their  prevailing  stars,  compel  them 
to  practise  the  wickedness  which  is  for- 
bidden by  their  Lord.  But  they  are  sub- 
ject to  sickness,  to  poverty,  to  pain,  and 
to  that  which  is  accounted  shame  by 
men.  For  as  our  freeman  does  not  suflier 
himself  to  be  compelled  to  slavery,  and 
if  he  is  compelled  resists  those  who  com- 
pel him,  so  on  the  other  hand,  the  man 
who  appears  to  us  a  slave,J  does  not  easily 
escape  from  subjection.  For,  if  every 
thing  was  in  our  own  power,  we  should 
be  TO  ■jTo.v  (the  universe,)  as,  if  we  were 
not  able  to  do  any  thing,  we  should  be 
the  ynere  instruments  of  others,  and  not 
of  ourselves.  But  when  God  helps,  every 
thing  is  possible,  and  no  obstacle  can 
exist,  because  nothing  can  resist  his  will. 


Demiurgos,  together  with  the  Demiurgos  himself,        *   See  Ephraem.  Syr.  0pp.  Sys.  Lat.  t.  ii.  p. 

arrive  at  a  consciousness  of  the  higher  worl<l-sys-  ;  5.53 — .5. 

tern,  which  the  Messiah  reveals,  and  serve  that  j      j-  See  pages  46,  47.    (Euseb.  Prtep.  Evang.  b. 

system  knowingly  and  willingly.     Origen,  t.  vi.    vi.  c.  10.) 

Joh.  §  12.     'o  K-.y^Q  /J.IV  0  lanti^  imv,  ^etvn  Jf  »  iv  \      t   ["  Unser  Erscheinungsmensch  alsein  dienst- 

ru  i^tijuai  TTdLTx  Tf04)HT/K«  Tat^r,  T<iv  i^aiv^vojxa'.TSgav    barer,"  &c.     The  original  is  thus:  'iioTri^  ytp  o 

tic  <tmin  /xeT:i^:M]i,  /xaSxrcw  /J.a  X^P*^'  ^'^'■'■''  Ti)  f*irit-  I  livaj  «-/5^»  uibt^THTit  tc/c  i-vuyii.ii^'.urn,  iVTcei  ivSi  o 
^■t>X'-uTn  w  xcycv  <fa)v>t  «  (it  ought  rather  to  be  t«v,)    <?3uv;/.(svo:  i/xmv  i'.vKo(  uv9gaiiT3f  T«f  t/-T«T«j)),-  iK^vyuv 

i-UKiU  ii  TJI  ua-0  tt)(^iU  t't!  (^HV.  1  fuJiu;  JuVATOU. — H.  J.  R.] 


280 


THE    OPHITES    AND    VALENTINIANS. 


And  even  if  any  thing  does  appear  to  op- 
pose him,  it  then  happens  so  because  he 
is  the  Good^  and  suffers  every  nature  to 
retain  its  peculiarities  and  its  freeioill.^''* 
In  accordance  with  his  system  he  searched 
for  traces  of  truth  among  all  nations,  and 
he  remarked  in  the  East  Indies  a  class  of 
(the  Brahmins,  Saniahs)  who  lived 
rigid  ascetic  life,  and  amidst  idolaters 
preserved  themselves  free  from  idolatry, 
and  worshipped  only  the  one  God. 

2.  T%e  Gnostic  sects,  which  denied  the  con- 
nection between  the  Old  and  JVeio  Testctr- 
ments,  and  between  tlve  visible  and  the 
invisible  world. 

(a.)  Tlie  Ophites. 

As  Cerinthus  formed  the  most  natural 
point  of  transition  from  the  Judaizing 
sects  to  the  Gnostics, — so  the  Ophites 
make  the  most  natural  point  of  transition 
from  the  Valenlinians  to  this  second  class 
of  Gnostics ;  for  it  is  here  shown  how 
the  same  ideas,  by  a  slightly  different 
turn,  may  lead  to  entirely  different  pro- 
positions. 

•  In  die  system  of  this  sect,  as  well  as  in 
that  of  the  Valentinians,  the  notion  of  a 
soul  of  the  world  prevailed,  of  a  weak 
reflection  of  light  from  the  Pleroma, 
which  falling  down  into  matter,  animated 
the  dead  mass,  and  yet  was  itself  affected 
by  matter  also;  this  soul  of  the  world, 
the  source  of  all  spiritual  life,  which  at- 
tracts again  to  itself  all  which  has  once 
flowed  from  it,  this  Pantheistic  doctrine, 
of  which  the  seed  had  already  been  sown 
in  the  Valentinian  system,  in  the  Ophitic 
scheme,  only  comes  forward  in  greater 
prominence,  as  the  essential  doctrines  of 
Christianity  are  driven  further  into  the 
back  ground ;  and  even  in  this  respect 
again,  different  modifications  appear  to 
have  found  place  in  diflerent  branches  of 
the  Ophitic  sects.  The  same  fundamen- 
tal principle  might,  at  the  same  time,  be 
conceived  and  applied  in  diflerent  modes, 
just  according  as  the  Christian,  the  purely 
oriental  and  theosophic,  or  the  Jewish  ele- 


•  [The  passage  which  Neandcr  has  here  se- 
lected is  so  limited  that  it  does  not  give  an  ade- 
quate view  of  the  meaning  of  Bardesancs.  The 
argument  of  13ardesanes  appears  to  be  of  this 
kind :  Some  things  arc  etvrt^'.va-iu-t  and  these  things 
are  changed  sometimes  in  nations,  others  are  not. 
The  things  that  are  in  our  own  power  are  not 
bound  down  in  stern  laws  of  necessity  by  climate. 
Such  things  may  be  instanced,  as  circumcision 
and  keeping  of  the  Sabbath ;  these  the  Jews  cele- 
brate every  where. — H.  J.  K] 


ment  happened  to  predominate  in  each 
case. 

The  Ophitic  system  represented  the 
origin  of  the  Demiurgos,  who  is  here 
called  Jaldabaolh,  exactly  in  the  same 
way  as  the  Valentinian  ;  and  even  in  the 
doctrine  of  his  relation  to  the  higher 
order  of  the  world,  the  point  of  transition 
(i.  e.  from  one  system  to  another,)  may 
be  easily  recognised.  The  Valentinian 
Demiurgos  is  a  limited  Being,  who  ima- 
gines, in  his  finite  faculties,  that  he  acts 
independently.  The  higher  order  of  the 
world  is  a  thing  altogether  strange  to 
him;  he  serves  it  without  being  conscious 
of  it.  In  the  phenomena  which  pro- 
ceeded from  it,  he  was  at  first  entirely  at 
a  loss,  he  was  surprised ;  but  this  is  not 
the  fault  of  a  wicked  disposition  in  him, 
only  of  his  ignorance.  At  length  he  is 
attracted  by  the  Divine  nature,  and  out  of 
a  condition  of  unconsciousness,  attains  at 
length  to  a  state  of  consciousness,  and  he 
now  serves  the  higher  order  of  the  world 
with  delight.  According  to  the  Ophitic 
scheme,  on  the  contrary,  he  is  a  being 
not  merely  finite,  but  entirely  at  enmity 
with  the  higher  order  of  the  world,  and 
obstinate  in  his  hatred  of  it.  Whatever 
of  higher  light  he  derived,  in  virtue  of  his 
descent  from  the  Sophia,  he  only  misused, 
that  he  might  set  himself  up  against  the 
higher  world,  and  make  himself  an  inde- 
pendent Lord.  Thence  came  the  desire 
of  the  Sophia  to  detach  him  from  the 
spiritual  being  which  had  accrued  to  him, 
and  to  draw  this  latter  again  to  herself, 
in  order  that  Jaldabaoth,  with  his  whole 
creation,  deprived  of  all  reasonable  being, 
might  be  destroyed.  On  the  contrary, 
according  to  the  Valentinian  scheme,  the 
Demiurgos  forms,  for  all  eternity,  a  sub 
ordinate  grade  of  rational  and  moral  ex 
istence  ;  subordinate,  indeed,  but  required 
for  the  harmonious  development  of  tlie 
Avhole.  And  yet,  here  again,  kindred- 
ideas  are  found  in  the  two  systems,  in 
the  circumstance  that  the  Demiurgos 
is  obliged,  without  knowing  it  or  wish- 
ing it,  to  serve  the  Sophia,  and  to  bring 
to  pass  the  fulfilment  of  her  intentions, 
and  in  the  end,  even  his  cum  fall  and 
annihilation.  This,  how^ever,  is  here  no 
distinction  for  the  Demiurgos,  as  in  the 
Valentinian  system  ;  but  in  this  very  cir- 
cumstance he  is  placed  exactly  on  the 
same  footing  with  the  Absolute  Evil  (the 
evil  principle  itself.)  It  flows  not  from 
the  excellence  of  his  nature,  but  from  the 
omnipotence  of  the  higher  system  of  the 
world.     Even  the  Evil  Spirit,  the  serpent- 


NATURE  OP  THE  SERPENT. — THE  FALL. 


281 


spirit.,  o(p»0|t*o§(po?  whose  existence  arose 
from  ihe  circumstance  that  Jaldabaoth, 
full  of  liatred  and  envy  against  man, 
looked  down  into  the  iA»),  and  formed  a 
reflection  and  image  of  himself  there, 
even  this  being  was  obliged,  against  his 
will,  to  become  only  an  instrument  for  the 
accomplishment  of  her  designs.  The  doc- 
trine of  the  origin  and  of  the  destination 
of  man,  in  this  system,  has,  however, 
much  in  common  with  the  Valentinian, 
but  at  the  same  time,  also,  much  which 
belongs  to  another  branch  of  the  Gnostic 
systems. 

In  order  to  establish  himself  as  an  in- 
dependent Creator  and  Lord,  and  to  hold 
in  subjection  the  six  angels*  begotten  by 
him,  and  to  distract  them,  so  that  they 
should  not  look  up  to  and  observe  the 
higher  Light  of  the  world,  Jaldabaoth  re- 
quired his  six  angels  to  create  man,  as 
their  common  form,  that  such  a  work 
might  set  the  stamp  upon  their  indepen- 
dent Divine  power.f  They  now  create 
man,  who  is,  however,  as  their  likeness, 
a  monstrous  mass  of  matter,  but  without 
a  soul ;  he  crawls  upon  the  earth,  and  is 
unable  to  hold  himself  upright.  They 
bring,  therefore,  this  helpless  being,  man, 
to  their  father,  that  he  may  bestow 
upon  him  a  soul.  Jaldabaoth  communi- 
cated to  him  a  living  spirit  ;J  and  by  that 
means  the  spiritual  seed  proceeded,  with- 
out his  being  aware  of  it,  from  out  of 
his  being  into  the  nature  of  man,  whereby 
he  himself  became  deprived  of  this  higher 
principle  of  life  :  the  Sophia  had  so  de- 
creed it.  In  man  (i.  e.  in  those  men  who 
have  received  any  portion  of  the  spiritual 
seed,)  the  light,  the  soul,  the  reason  of 
the  whole  creation,  concentres  itself.  Jal- 
dabaoth is  now  seized  with  surprise  and 
anger,  because  he  sees  a  being,  created  by 
himself,  and  dwelling  within  the  limits  of 
his  dominion,  on  the  point  of  raising  him- 
self above  him  and  his  kingdom.  Thence 
arose  his  endeavour,  not  to  allow  him  to 
come  to  a  consciousness  of  his  higher 
nature,  and  of  the  higher  world  to  which 
he  is  allied  in  virtue  of  that  nature,  and 
to  keep  him  in  a  state    of   dull  uncon- 


•  It  must  be  observed,  that  according  to  the 
Ophitic  system,  Jaldabaoth  and  his  six  angels  are 
the  spirit-s  of  the  seven  stars, — the  sun,  the  moon, 
Mars,  Venus,  Jupiter,  Mercury,  and  Saturn  :  the 
same  from  which,  in  the  books  of  the  Zabians, 
and  in  many  systems  of  Jewish  Theosophists,  a 
variety  of  delusions  and  seductions  of  mankind 
have  proceeded.' 

■[  Thus  they  explain  the  words  of  Genesis  i.  26. 

^  This  they  thought  they  found  in  Genesis  ii.  7. 

36 


sciousness,  and  thereby  of  slavish  ser- 
vitude. It  was  from  the  jealousy  of  Jal- 
dabaoth, who  was  thus  limited,  tiiat  there 
proceeded  that  command  to  the  first  man ; 
but  the  sold  of  the  world  made  use  of  the 
scrpcnt-spiril  (of  the  oipto^o^ipof)  as  an 
instrument  in  order  to  frustrate  the  design 
of  Jaldabaoth,  while  through  it  she  en- 
ticed the  first  man  to  disobedience.  Ac- 
cording to  another  view,  the  serpent  was 
itself  a  symbol,  or  a  veiled  appearance  of 
the  soul  of  the  world  ;*  and  those  Ophites 
who  held  this  doctrine  are  the  persons, 
who,  properly,  bear  the  name  of  Ophites^ 
because  they  worshipped  the  serpent  as 
a  holy  symbol,  to  whicli  a  kindred  no- 
tion of  the  Egyptian  religion  might  have 
led  them,  because  in  that  the  serpent  is 
considered  as  the  symbol  of  Kneph,  or 
the  uyx^ola.ii/.ut^  which  was  similar  to  the 
cro(p»a  of  the  Ophites,  At  all  events  it 
was  the  soul  of  the  world,  by  which, 
either  mediately  or  immediately,  the  eyes 
of  the  first  man  were  opened. 

The  fall  by  sin  (which  gives  us  a  cha- 
racteristic trait  in  the  Ophitic  system,) 
was  the  point  of  transition  from  a  condi- 
tion of  unconscious  restriction  to  a  condi- 
tion of  conscious  knowledge.  Man,  be- 
come a  being  of  knowledge,  now  re- 
nounces his  allegiance  to  Jaldabaoth,  who, 
being  irritated  at  his  disobedience,  pushes 
him  out  of  the  ethereal  region,  where  he 
had  hitherto  existed  in  an  ethereal  body, 
down  into  the  dark  earth,  and  banishes 
him  into  a  dark  body.  Man  finds  himself 
now  in  such  a  condition,  that  on  the  one 
hand  the  seven  star-spirits  attempt  to  keep 
him  in  imprisonment,  and  to  overwhelm 
the  higher  principle  of  consciousness 
within  him, — while,  on  the  other,  the  evil 
spirits  of  a  purely  material  nature,  en- 
deavour to  seduce  him  to  sin  and  to 
idolatry,  in  order  that  he  may  become 
lial)le  to  the  punishments  of  the  severe 
Jaldabaoth.  But  yet  the  Sophia  constantly 
strengthens  anew  the  men  who  were  of 
kindred  nature  witli  herself,  by  new  com- 
munications of  that  higher  spiritual  na- 
ture; and  she  was  able,  during  all  the  de- 
structions and  storms,  to  preserve  a  race 
of  people  belonging  to  herself  from  the 
time  of  Seth,  whom  all  Gnostics  look  upon 


*  The  serpent,  an  image  of  the  7juK,y:v:i:  (To<pi*; 
the  form  of  the  intestines  winding  itself  represents 
the  image  of  a  serpent,  a  symbol  of  that  wisdom 
of  nature,  that  soul  of  the  world,  which  winds 
itself  concealed  through  all  the  grades  of  life  found 
in  nature.  Theodoret.  ha?ret.  fab.  vol.  i.  14. 
One  sees  how  far  more  the  pantheistic  principle 
here  sliines  through  these  notions. 
2a2 


282 

as  the  representative  of  the  w»EtijM,«Tixo», 
the  men  of  a  contemplative  character,  in 
which  race  she  preserves  the  seed  of  the 
spiritual  nature. 

The  doctrines  of  the  Ophites  corres- 
ponded with  those  of  Basilides  and  the 
Valentinians,  as  to  the  relation  of  the 
psychical  Christ,  or  Jesus,  to  the  Christ 
of  the  u-orhl  of  JT-ons,  who  united  him- 
self to  the  former  at  his  baptism.  This 
only  is  peculiar  to  them  (the  Ophites,) 
that  while  the  higher  Christ  descended 
through  the  seven  heavens  of  the  seven 
angels,  or  traversed  the  seven  stars,  in 
order  to  arrive  at  the  earth,  he  appeared 
in  each  heaven,  in  a  form  akin  to  that 
heaven,  as  an  angel  allied  to  it,  and  that 
he  concealed  from  them  his  higher  natnre, 
and  attracting  to  himself  all  which  they 
still  possessed  of  the  spiritual  seed,  he 
thus  weakened  their  power.  But  now, 
when  .Jaldabaoth,  the  God  of  the  Jews, 
saw  his  expectations  frustrated  by  his 
Messiah,  and  when  this  Messiah  did  not 
further  his  kingdom  as  he  had  wished  and 
expected  him  to  do,  but  announced  the 
unknown  father  as  the  instrulnent  of  the 
higher  Christ,  and  destroyed  the  law  of 
Jaldabaoth,  or  rather  Judaism,  Jaldabaoth 
then  brought  about  his  crucifixion.  Jesus 
remained  eighteen  months  on  earth  after 
his  resurrection,  obtained  through  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Sophia  a  clear  knowledge 
of  the  higher  truth,  and  then  communi- 
cated it  only  to  a  few  of  his  disciples, 
whom  he  knew  competent  to  receive  such 
mysteries.  Jesus  is  now  raised  by  the 
heavenly  Christ  into  heaven,  and  sits  at 
the  right  hand  of  Jaldabaoth,  without  the 
latter  being  conscious  of  it,  in  order  that 
he  may  attract  to  himself,  and  receive  into 
himself,  all  the  spiritual  substance,  which 
is  set  free  and  purified  by  the  operation 
of  redemption  among  mankind,  as  soon  as 
that  substance  has  been  detached  from  its 
covering  of  flesh.  Tlie  more  Jesus,  by 
tin's  drawing  to  himself  all  that  is  akin  to 
him,  is  enriclied  in  his  own  spiritual  na- 
ture, so  much  the  more  is  Jaldabaoth  de- 
nuded of  all  higher  qualities.  The  object 
of  all  this  is  to  set  free  all  the  spiritual  life 
which  is  held  captive  in  natm-e,  and  to  re- 
conduct it  to  its  original  source, — to  the 
soul  of  tlie  world  from  which  all  pro- 
ceeded :  Jesus  is  the  channel  through 
which  this  happens.  The  s/ar.s  also  must 
at  last  be  deprived  of  all  being  gifted  with 
reason  which  is  found  in  them. 

In  this  family  of  Gnostics  there  were 
some  who  maintained  even  a  more  con- 
sistent pantheism,  and  supposed  that  the 


PANTHEISM    OF   THE    OPHITES. 


same  soul  was  extended  throughout  the 
whole  of  nature,  animate  and  inanimate 
and  that,  in  consequence,  all  the  life  which 
was  scattered  abroad  and  held  in  impri- 
sonment by  the  bonds  of  matter  in  the 
limited  state  of  individual  existence,  would 
at  last  be  attracted  by  the  original  source, 
the  soul  of  the  world,  the  Sophia,  from 
which  it  had  flowed  forth,  and  thus  flow 
back  again  into  it  through  this  channel. 
Such  persons  would  say,  when  we  use 
the  objects  of  nature  to  our  sustenance, 
we  draw  to  ourselves  seed  which  are  scat- 
tered over  them,  and  we  raise  them  with 
us  to  the  original  source  of  all  things.* 
Therefore,  in  an  apocryphal  gospel  of 
this  sect,  the  soul  of  the  world,  or  the  Su- 
preme Being  himself,  spoke  to  the  ini- 
tiated thus  :  "  Thou  art  1,  and  I  am  thou  ; 
and  where  thou  art,  there  am  I,  and  I  am 
spread  over  every  thing.  Where  thou 
wilt  thou  canst  collect  me,  and  where  thou 
collectest  me,  there  thou  collectest  thy- 
self."    (Chap,  iii.) 

Pantheism,  and  the  intermixture  of  the 
natural  and  the  Divine  which  flowed  from 
it,  by  their  very  nature  could  not  be  very 
exacting  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  although 
in  those  men  who  had  embraced  Pantheism, 
their  previously  existing  moral  sentiments 
might  communicate  even  to  the  system 
itself  a  moral  spirit  which  was  foreign  to 
its  own  nature.  Pantheism,  and  a  wild 
enthusiastic  spirit  of  defiance  towards 
Jaldabaoth,  and  his  pretended  restrictive 
statutes,  appear  in  fact  to  have  misled  a 
part  of  these  Ophites  into  the  most  unna- 
tural excesses.f 


*  Epiphan.  Haeres.  26.  c.  9. 

-f  As  the  accounts  of  Epiphanius  in  this  matter 
a^ree  with  those  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  a 
person  more  worthy  of  credit,  and  of  Porphyry, 
about  similar  Gnostic  sects,  and  as  they  bear  an 
entirely  characteristic  stamp  upon  them,  we  are 
by  no  means  justified  in  calling  their  correctness 
into  question.  Nor  can  the  fact  alleged  here  be 
considered  a  thing  to  astonish  us  at  all ;  similar 
excesses,  arising  from  a  pantheistic  mysticism, 
have  been  often  found,  not  only  in  the  east,  but  in 
the  west  also,  as  the  history  of  the  sects  of  the 
middle  ages  and  of  modern  times  will  prove.  The 
latest  examples  may  be  found  in  De  Potter's  Via 
de  Kicci.  v.  i. 

The  instances  are  too  well  known  to  readers  of 
any  general  information  to  require  specification, 
I\o  references  will,  therefore,  he  given.  It  is 
enough  to  state  the  fact  as  illustrating  a  mental 
and  spiritual  phenomenon,  but  it  is  unfit  to  dwell 
upon. 

[Other  instances  might  be  found  in  modern 
days  where  what  was  originally,  perhaps,  only  a 
highly  wrought  speculative  doctrihe,  became  sub- 
ject to  this  dreadful  perversion.  They  could 
easily  be  cited,  but  it  is  needless,  and  perhaps, 


PSEUDO-BASILIDIANS.  283 

ft  is  of  great  importance  towards  the  \  end  a  token  to  show  that  men  were  disci- 
history  of  the  Gnostic  sects  to  inquire,  |  pies  of  the  higher  Christ.  Something 
altiiough  the  inquiry  be  difficult  of  solu-  I  similar  is  found  in  the  sect  of  the  Sabians^ 
tion,  whether  these  Ophites  sprouted  forth  |  who  referred  much  which  they  took  out 
from  a  religious  sect,  which  originally  had  of  the  history  of  Christ  to  a  heavenly 
no  connection  at  all  with  Christianity,  ^C7i/«s,  </<e  ow^e/ of ///e,  Mando  di  Chaje, 
and  whether,  on  that  account,  as  a  part  of  whom  they  worshipped  as  the  proper 
this  sect  had  already  appropriated  to  itself  [  Christ,  from  whom  the  true  baptism  pro- 
much  which  was  Christian,  a  party  existed  !  ceeded,  while  they  referred  the  rest  to 
also  of  those  Ophites,  who  were  quite  out  i  the  Antichrist  Jesus,  (who  had  counter- 
of  the  pale  of  Christianity,  and  who  [  feited  the  baptism  of  John,)  who  was  sent 
rather  set  themselves  in  hostility  to  it  ? !  by  the  star-spirits  for  the  seduction  of 
The  latter  appears  to  be  attested  by  an  I  mankind, 
account  given  by  Origen,  who  says,  that 


the  Ophites  were  no  Christians,  and  that 
they  suffered  no  one  who  did  not  curse 
Christ  to  enter  into  their  assemblies.  He 
names  a  certain  Euphrates,  who  may  have 
lived  before  the  birth  of  Christ,  as  the 
founder  of  their  sect.*  The  Ophitic 
pantheism  may  very  probably  have  been 
borrowed  from  an  older  Oriental  system 
of  religion,  and  have  been  set  in  opposi- 
tion to  Christianity  only  by  some,  while 


(b.)  Psendo-Basilidians. 

As  we  see  in  the  Ophitic  system  how 
entirely  different  a  direction  the  princi- 
ples allied  to  the  Valentinian  system  may 
receive  by  a  slightly  different  modifica- 
tion and  application,  so  we  find  a  similar 
circumstance  in  the  relations  borne  by  a 
variety  of  the  Basilidian  scheme,  the  doc- 
trines of  which  are  often  confused  with 
those  of   the  genuine  Basilidians.     The 


It  may  have  been  clothed  m  a  Christian  calm  and  moderate  spirit  of  the  Basilidiaa 

garb  by  the  others.     The  remarkable  like-  system*  was  here  entirely  extinguished, 

ness  between  the  Ophitic  system,  those  and  the  direct  opposition  to  the  Demi- 

of  the  Sabians,  and  the  Manichemis  may  „rgos,  and  the  Antinomianism,  which  was 


indicate  an  older  and  a  common  source 
in  an  antichristian  Gnosis.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  the 
Ophitic  formulae  of  adjuration,  which 
Origen  quotes  immediately  after  this  de- 


connected  with  it,  degenerated  here  into 
a  wild  dreaminess  that  made  light  of  all 
that  is  most  holy.  According  to  their 
theory,  the  redeeming  Spiriff  could  enter 
into  no  connection  with  the  detested  do- 


claration,  plamly  contam  allusions  to  minions  of  the  Demiurgos,  and  he  took 
Christian  notions.  And  it  may  still  be  |  „pon  himself  only  the  semblance  of  a 
the  case,  that  although  the  Ophitic  sect  [  corporeal  form.  When  the  Jews  were 
appeared  from  the  very  first  as  a  Christian  ijnmded  to  crucify  him,  he,  as  a  highly 
sect,  yet  the  contrast  to  the  nature  of  gifted  Spirit,  knowing  how  to  clothe  him- 
Chnstianity  which  lay  in  its  peculiar  self  in  every  kind  of  corporeal  appear- 
constitution  also  constantly  became  out-  ^nce,  and  to  cast  every  sort  of  illusion 
wardly  more  prominent ;  and  that,  as  |)ef„re  the  eyes  of  the  gross-minded  mul- 
the  contrast  between  the  Demiurgos  and  ^  titude,  caused  Simon  of  Cyrene,  (Mark 
the  Supreme  God  was  so  strongly  brought  xv.,)  to  appear  to  the  Jews  in  his  likeness  ; 
forward  by  them,  so  also,  in  consequence  j^e  himself  took  the  form  of  this  Simon, 
of  the  distinction  between  the  psychical  a„d  raised  himself  up  unencumbered  into 
and  the  pneumatical  Christ,  there  arose  the  invisible  world,  making  a  mockery  of 
at  last  in  some  portion  of  the  Ophites,  a  the  deluded  Jews.  To  these  men  the 
hostile  opposition  to  the  tormert  (the  iJoctrine  of  the  cross  M'as  foolishness ; 
psychical;)  so  that,  to  curse  the  finite  !  g^d  in  the  conceit  of  their  theosophic 
Messiah  of  the  psychici,  became  in  ihejprjde,  they  mocked  those  who  confessed 

.                   :     7~r~,    ;      :      '.               r.      lit  as   the  confessors  of  a  mere  illusory 
improper,  as  it  might  lead  to  inquiry  on  a  subject,  1     ,       .             ,,  o      i              v  .1                 11 
which  could  end  only  in  disgust    It  is  enough  to  '  Phantom.     "  Such  men,"  they  would  say, 
state  the  fact  as  a  mental  phenomenon,  and  to  |  "are  no    Jews,   neither  are   they    Chris- 
leave  any  specification  till  the  assertion  is  called  in ■ 

question. — H.  J.  R.]  I      •   Were   it   not   that   Clement   of  Alexandria 

•  Origen  c.  Gels.  lib.  vi.  c.  28,  &c.  The  '  spoke  of  practical  errors  in  pretended  followers  of 
obscure  and  uncritical  Philaster,  who  sets  the  Basilides,  similar  to  those  found  in  this  sect,  we 
Ophites  at  the  head  of  the  antichristian  sects,  might  be  led  to  suspect  that  those  whom  Irena;us 
cannot  be  valid  as  an  authority.  calls  Basilidians  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with 

f  I  am  indebted  for  this  observation  to  the  pro-    Basilides. 
found  critique  on  my  work  about  the  Gnostics,  ;      j-  The  tcus.    See  p.  2.57,  on   the  system  of  Ba- 
written  by  i)r.  Gieseler.  |  silides. 


284  SATURNINUS. 


tians."  They  despised  tha  martyrs  as 
men  who  gave  up  their  life  merely  to  con- 
fess in  the  name  of  a  phantom.  "  Those 
who  are  initiated  into  the  true  mysteries 
know  well,  that  only  one  out  of  thousands 
can  understand  them  :  as  your  nou?  was 
able  to  make  himself  invisible  to  all  men, 
so  could  they*  also,  like  this  your  jot/;, 
hide  themselves  in  all  kinds  of  phantoms, 
and  pretend  to  take  a  part  in  every  thing, 
in  order  to  deceive  the  gross  multitude, 
and  to  withdraw  from  their  persecu- 
tions."! 

(c.)  Sethites  and  Cainites. 

The  example  of  the  Sethites  and 
Cainites,  who  most  probably  are  derived 
from  the  same  source  as  the  Ophites, 
teaches  us  how  the  same  Gnostic  princi- 
ples, by  being  differently  applied,  may 
produce  an  opposite  kind  of  Gnosis.  The 
first  of  these  two  sects  maintained,  that 
from  the  beginning  two  human  pairs 
were  created,  the  one  by  the  angels  of 
darkness,  from  which  the  race  of  ^oixoi 
or  i^ixot  arose,  the  other,  by  the  angels 
of  the  Deiniurgos,  from  which  the  race 
of -^vxiy-oi  was  derived;  that  Cain  sprung 
from  the  first,  Abel  from  tlie  second  ;  and, 
the  two  opposite  natures  contending  to- 
gether, that  the  weaker  psychical  nature 
was  overborne;  but  that  then  Sophia 
allowed  Seth  to  be  born  in  his  stead,  in 
whom  (viz.  Seth,)  she  had  implanted  the 
higher  spiritual  seed,  by  which  he  was 
rendered  capable  of  overcoming  the  hylic 
principle.  From  Seth  the  iT»eviJ.a.Tmoi  de- 
rived their  origin ;  but,  the  opposing 
powers  now  seeking  constantly  to  defile 
the  propagation  of  this  spiritual  race  by 
the  intermixture  of  ungodly  natures,  So- 
phia, on  this  account,  produced  the  de- 
luge, in  order  again  to  purify  the  degene- 
rated race  ;  but  her  adversaries  contrived 
to  suffer  a  Ham  to  insinuate  himself 
among  those  who  were  saved  out  of  the 
mass  of  mankind  that  was  destroyed,  and 
by  him  their  dominion  was  again  to  be 
set  up  and  extended.  Thence  came  new 
mixtures  and  disorders,  and  again  Sophia 
had  to  endeavour  to  produce  new  purifi- 


•  This  art  of  becoming  invisible  is  amons;  the 
Cabbalistic  arts  also.  A  very  remarkable  instance 
of  this  fancy  is  to  be  found  in  Maimonides'  history 
of  his  own  life;  and  there  are  generally  many 
interesting  echoes  of  Gnosticism  to  be  found  in 
the  latter  Jewish  sects,  which  Beer  has  delineated 
in  his  instructive  history  of  the  .Jewish  sects. 
(Briinn,  182'2.) 

j-  Irenaeus  i,  24. 


cations :   Seth  appeared  at  last  in  the  per- 
son of  the  Messiah.* 

The  Cainites,  on  the  contrary,  were 
abominable  Antinomians ;  they  M^ent  to 
such  a  length  in  their  hatred  to  the  Demi- 
urgos  and  to  the  Old  Testament,  that  they 
made  all  those  whom  they  found  repre- 
sented in  the  latter  (the  Old  Testament) 
in  the  worst  colours,  their  Coryph.'Ei,  as 
being  sons  of  Sophia  and  enemies  of  the 
Demiurgos;  and  hence  they  claimed  Cain 
for  their  party.  It  was  these  persons 
who,  while  they  considered  the  rest  of  the 
apostles  as  narrow-minded  men,  ascribed 
the  higher  Gnosis  to  Judas  Iscariot,  who 
effected  the  death  of  Jesus,  because  he 
knew,  in  virtue  of  his  superior  illumina- 
tion, that  the  destruction  of  the  dominion 
of  the  Demiurgos  would  by  this  means 
be  brought  about. 

(d.)  Saturninus. 

We  recognise  a  peculiar  branch  of  the 
Gnostic  systems  in  the  doctrines  of  Sa- 
turninus, who  lived  at  Antioch  in  the 
reign  of  Hadrian ;  but  we  have,  it  must 
be  confessed,  in  both  the  principal  sources 
of  information,!  too  imperfect  data,  to  be 
able  to  recognise  this  system  in  its  whole 
connection.  (We  pass  over  without  men- 
tion whatever  he  has  in  common  with 
the  Gnostics,  whom  we  have  already  de- 
scribed, as  to  the  emanation-doctrines, 
and  as  to  those  of  dualism.) 

In  the  lowest  grade  of  the  emanation- 
world,  on  the  very  borders  between  the 
domain  of  light  and  the  region  of  dark- 
ness, or  of  (Hyle)  iA»),  stood  the  seven 
lowest  angels,  those  star-spirits;  they 
unite  together  in  order  to  win  from  the 
region  of  darkness  a  land  on  which  they 
may  carry  on  an  independent  kingdom. 
Thus  arose  our  world,  tlie  eartii,  into 
different  parts  of  which  these  star-spirits 
apportioned  themselves,  the  God  of  tlie 
Jews  being  at  their  head  :  they  carry  on 
a  constant  war  against  the  reign  of  dark- 
ness and  Satan  its  prince,  who  will  not 
suffer  their  dominion  to  be  extended  at 
the  expense  of  his,  and  who  constantly 
attempts  to  destroy  that  which  they  con- 
struct. Only  a  faint  gleam  from  the 
higher  regions  of  light  shone  down  upon 
them  here.  This  gleam  of  light  filled 
them  with  a  desire  of  it,  and  they  wished 
to  possess  themselves  of  it,  but  were  too 
1  weak    to  do  so :    it  constantly   recedes 

'      *  See  the  representation  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
I  Clementine,  jtages  236,  2.37. 
[     !  Epiphanius  and  Irensus. 


SATURNINtJS. — ^TITIAN. 


a^ain,  just  as  they  desire  to  lay  hold  of 
it  They  unite,  therefore,  in  order  to 
drive  these  higher  beams  of  lig^ht  into 
their  dominion  by  means  of  a  form  cast 
after  the  image  of  that  form  of  light  which 
played  before  them.  But  the  form  of  the 
angel  rs  unable  to  raise  himself  into 
heaven ;  he  cannot  stand  upright  ;*  he  is 
a  lump  of  matter  without  a  soul.  The 
supreme  Father,  from  the  kingdom  of 
light,  at  last  takes  compassion  on  man, 
being  thus  helpless,  although  made  in  his 
likeness  ;  he  communicates  a  spark  of  his 
own  divine  nature  to  him,  and  man,  now 
for  the  first  time,  becomes  a  being  endued 
■with  a  soul,  and  can  lift  himself  up  to 
heaven.  In  the  human  natures^  into  whicli 
it  is  transplanted,  this  divine  seed  of  life 
is  to  develope  itself  till  it  arrives  at  inde- 
pendence, and  after  a  certain  time  to  return 
to  its  original  source.  Those  men  who, 
bearing  this  Divine  seed  w'ilhin  them,  are 
destined  to  reveal  the  Supreme  God  on 
earth,  are  constantly  opposed  to  those 
who  bear  within  tliem  only  the  hylic 
principle,  as  being  the  instruments  of  the 
kingdom  of  darkness.  The  Supreme  God, 
therefore, — in  order  to  destroy  both  the 
kingdom  of  the  star-spirits,  of  the  God 
of  the  Jews,  which  endeavoured  to  render 
itself  independent,  and  that  of  darkness 
also,  and  in  order  to  set  free  those  men 
who  w^ere  akin  to  him  (the  Supreme  God,) 
by  means  of  the  Divine  seed  of  life,  from 
the  imprisonment  of  the  star-spirits,  and 
to  procure  them  a  victory  over  the  king- 
dom of  darkness, — the  Supreme  God 
sent  his  ^on  »ot;j  down ;  this  iEon  being 
unable  to  enter  into  union  in  any  way 
with  the  kingdom  of  the  stars,  or  with 
the  material  world,  could  hence  only  show 
himself  in  the  phantom  (or  semblance)  of 
a  corporeal  form.  The  doctrines  of  Sa- 
turninus  led  to  a  strict  system  of  asceticism, 
and  to  the  precept  of  celibacy,  which  was 
possibly,  however,  observed  only  in  its 
strictness  by  those  who  were  peculiarly 
initiated  into  the  sect,  and  not  by  its  ordi- 
nary members. 

(e.)  Tatian  and  the  Encratitcs. 

Tatian,  of  Assyria,  lived  in  Rome  as 
a  rhetorician,  and  was  there  converted  to 
Christianity  by  Justin  Martyr,  who  had 
much  in  common  with  him,  in  virtue  of 
the  similar  mental  education  he  had  un- 
dergone, as  having  formerly  been  a  Pla- 
tonist.  As  long  as  Justin  lived  he  ad- 
hered to  the   doctrines   of   the  Church. 


285 

And  even  farther,  after  the  death  of  Justin, 
he  composed  an  apologetic  writing,*  con- 
ceived in  the  same  tone  of  thought,  in 
which,  however,  there  was  much  which 
might  afterwards  afford  an  opening  for 
Gnosticism.  Tatian  in  this  writing,  as  his 
master  Justin  had  done,  received,  after 
Philo,  the  Platonic  doctrine  about  matter, 
in  its  whole  extent,  into  his  system,  little 
calculated  as  that  doctrine  was  to  suit  his 
system,  as  he  at  the  same  time  maintained 
the  notion  of  a  creation  out  of  nothing. 
This  Platonic  theory  also  prevailed  upon 
him  to  maintain  the  notion  of  an  undivine 
spirit  of  life,  united  with  and  akin  to 
matter,  a  reason-counteracting  soul;  and 
hence  he  deduced  evil  spirits,  whom  he 
represents  as  iniviA.xT»  vM>ioc,  little  as  this 
theory  was  in  accordance  with  the  Chris- 
tian doctrine  of  the  nature  of  the  evil 
spirit,  and  of  the  origin  of  evil.  Even  in 
this  writing  he  already  maintained  a  pro- 
position which  was  elsewhere  transplanted 
by  many  of  the  first  Christian  Fathers 
from  the  Jewish  theology ;  viz.  that  the 
souls  of  men,  like  every  thing  else,  are 
formed  out  of  matter,  and  are  akin  to  it,! 
and  therefore,  by  their  nature,  mortal; 
that  the  first  man.  living  in  communion 
with  God,  had  within  himself  a  principle 
of  divine  life,  of  a  more  elevated  nature 
than  this  soul,  sprung  from  matter,  and 
that  this  principle  was  properly  the  image 
of  God.J  whereby  he  was  immortal.  By 
losing  this  through  sin,  he  fell  under  the 
power  of  matter,  and  was  subject  to 
mortality. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  these  opinions, 
which,  according  to  Titian's  system,  were 
not  very  consistent  with  each  other,  might 
serve  as  a  means  of  introduction  to  the 
Gnostic  ideas  of  the  v\yi,  and  of  the  dif- 
ference between  the  \,v'j(^y.ov,  and  the 
7tviV(xa.riKoy ;  and  a  system  of  asceticism, 
which  strove  after  a  complete  detachment 
from  the  things  of  sense,§  might  be  the 
result.ll  According  to  the  account  of 
Irenfeus^f  he  formed  for  himself  a  system 
of  jEons,  like  that  of  the  Valentinians  ; 


See  the  history  of  the  Ophites,  page  280. 


•  His  Ac>oc  TTfji  'Exxxv*;. 

"(■  A  TTVauX*  ■jKlK'iV. 

i  Qi-.u  tlicaiv  K!U  ojucia^rt: 

§  [Entsinnlichiing.— H.  J.  R.] 

II  Accordins;  to  Irenjcus,  i.  28,  he  maintained  at 
first  the  condemnation  of  the  first  man,  which 
would  harmonize  well  enougrh  with  the  difTcrcnce 
we  have  remarked  t)Ctwecn  the  -[uyjit.i  and  the 
cTvai^«T«'-v  in  the  nature  of  the  first  man,  which 
latter  [i.  e.  the  Tvec/w^Tix-.v]  he  lost  by  sin. 

^  Comp.  Clem.  Strom,  iii.  46.5.  C.  [Sylb.  p. 
100.     Pott.  p.  553.     Klotz.  voL  ii.  p.  259.] 


286 


but  this  is  not  a  sufficient  ground  to  con- 
clude with  certainty  that  his  system  was 
connected  with  the  Valentinian.  Accord- 
ing to  Clement  of  Alexandria*  he  be- 
longed to  the  class  of  anti-Jewish  Gnos- 
tics ;  he  referred  the  contrast  made  by  St. 
Paul  between  the  old  and  the  new  man  to 
llie  relation  between  the  Old  and  the  N  ew 
Testaments;  but  this  also  he  might  express 
according  to  the  Valentinian  Gnosis, 
which  sets  by  no  means  an  absolute  op- 
position between  the  two  systems  of  reli- 
gion. A  remark  of  Tatian,  which  has 
been  preserved,  appears  to  indicate,  that 
he  by  no  means  so  entirely  detached  the 
Demiurgos,  the  God  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, from  connection  with  the  higher 
world. t  The  words  of  Genesis,  "  Let 
there  be  light,"  he  considered  (an  instance, 
by  the  way,  of  his  arbitrary  mode  of  Scrip- 
tural interpretation)  not  as  the  words  of  a 
commandment  given  by  the  Creator,butas 
the  words  of  prayer.  The  Demiurgos, 
sitting  in  dark  chaos,  prays  that  light  may 
shine  down  from  above.  His  wild, 
ascetic  turn,  however,  may  have  arisen 
from  the  following  circumstance,  namely, 
that  he  made  a  more  direct  opposition 
between  the  creation  of  the  Demiurgos 
and  the  higher  world,  and  hence,  also, 
between,  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ments, than  could  find  place  according  to 
the  principles  of  the  Valentinian  school ; 
for  that  practical  opposition  to  the  crea- 
tion of  the  Demiurgos  was  usually  found- 
ed  in  a  theoretical  one.  Tatian  wrote  a 
book  on  Christian  perfection  after  the 
example  of  our  Saviour^'l  in  which  he 
sets  forth  Christ  as  the  ideal  of  a  single 
and  abstinent  life.  If  in  this  he  kept  simply 
to  our  canonical  Gospels,  and  used  no 
apocryphal     narratives,§     in     which    the 


•  Stromat  lib.  ill.  460.  D.  [Sylb.  p.  197-8. 
Potter,  p.  548.     Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  2.59.] 

f  TheJot.  Di<]a.scal.  Anatol.  fol.  806.  Origeties 
tie  Oratione,  c.  24. 

i  Ilipt  T  u  x,ir%  Tcv  a-enDipt  Kfrttpria-jucv. 

§  We  should  know  more  of  this  matter,  if  the 
tj-j-yyiktvi  Stt  iM-trvpaiv  had  been  preserved.  This 
writing  ap[)eare<l  to  the  ancients  to  be  a  short  har- 
mony of  the  four  Gospels,  Euseb.  iv.  29  ;  l)ut  it  is 
a  question  whether  Tatian  did  not  use,  for  that 
work,  many  apocryphal  Gospels  at  least;  as,  ac- 
cording; to  the  notice  of  Epiphanius,  p.  26, 
which  is,  however,  very  indefinite — this  collection 
appears  to  have  had  some  similarity  to  the  t'j  i.y- 
yiMv  K  6'  y.p.fxi'.v:  Theodoret  found  more  than 
two  hundred  copies  of  this  writing  in  use  in  his 
Syrian  diocese,  and  he  found  a  necessity  for  send- 
irig  them  out  of  use,  because,  probably,  he  found 
much  that  was  heretical  in  them. — Theodoret. 
Haeret.  Fab.  i.  20.  Tatian. 


-ASCETICIS.M. ^JULIUS    CASSIANUS. 


picture  of  Christ  had  already  been  drawn 
after  a  theosophico-ascetic  mode],  much 
must  have  met  him  here  in  such  direct 
opposition,  that  it  might  have  removed 
him  from  this  mode  of  thinking.  But 
we  see  by  an  example  how  Tatian  was 
able,  by  means  of  his  illogical  mode  of 
interpretation,  to  explain  into  an  accord- 
ance with  his  opinions  the  passages  of 
Scripture  the  most  unfavourable  to  him. 
since  he  could  find  in  the  passage  in 
1  Cor.  vii.  5,  that  St.  Paul  sets  marriage  and 
incontinency  on  the  same  footing,  and 
calls  them  both  a  service  of  Satan.*  As 
the  disposition  for  such  a  theosophic  asce- 
ticism was  then,  having  arisen  in  the  east, 
widely  diffused,  it  cannot  surprise  us  to 
find  that  there  were  different  sects  of  such 
continentes,\  who  had  no  immediate  con- 
nection with  Tatian. 

To  these  belonged  Julius  Cassianus, 
who  considered  Adam  as  the  symbol  of 
souls  sunk  down  out  of  a  heavenly  con- 
dition into  the  world  of  bodies,  and  he, 
therefore,  made  it  a  chief  point  that  man 
should  detach  himself  from  matter  by  a 
strict  asceticism,  and  on  that  very  account 
also  would  not  allow  any  appearance  of 
Christ  in  the  world  of  bodies;  he  was 
therefore,  one  of  the  Docetce.  He  may, 
probably,  have  been  an  Mexandrian  Jew; 
his  peculiar  opinions,  his  doctrines  of  the 
materializalionj  of  souls  and  about  mat- 
ter^ and  his  docetism,  which  last  theory 
Philo  had  already  applied  to  the  Theo- 
phanise  (appearances  of  God)  of  the  Old 
Testament,§  fitted  on  remarkably  well  to 
notions  which  had  long  been  current 
among  the  Alexandrian  Jews,  and   in  his 

*  St.  Paul  gives  permission  in  that  passage  only 
apparently  ;  he  withdraws  again  instantly  from  that 
which  he  permits,  by  saying,  that  those  who  fol- 
low his  permission  serve  two  masters.  By  their 
mutual  abstinence  united  with  pwyer  they  would 
serve  God ;  by  the  opposite  conduct  they  would 
serve  immodesty,  lust,  and  Satan. — Strom,  iii.  p. 
460.  (See  note  to  p.  109.)  According  to  Euse- 
bius  iv.  29,  he  was  accused  of  having  made 
many  changes  in  St.  Paul's  expressions ;  but  from 
the  words  of  Eusebius,  tnu^  aurcv  /uiT-X'^pta-st.t 
<^yit  'i'"  iTriSr.pBcvjuiviiv  oLuTm  tdv  'Di:  cfp  'erne:  avv- 
T-i^iv,  we  cannot  see  plainly  whether  they  were 
changes  in  favour  of  his  own  doctrinal  and  ethi- 
cal princi[iles,  or  changes  from  Hebraistic  ex- 
pressions into  purer  Greek  ;  and  then  one  is  led 
to  inquire  whether  Tatian  really  allowed  himself 
to  use  such  licence  as  a  critic  (which  may  have 
been  the  case,)  or  whether  he  had  only  difierent 
readings. 

f'F.j-xftr/Tsu  iTTcrtiiTiKU. 

^  P^inkorperung ;  Lit.  Embodying,  Incorpora- 
tion. 

§  See  Philo  on  Exod.  xxiv.  13.  Opp.  Ed.  Mang. 
t.  ii.  p.  679,  636.  de  Abrahamo,  366.  Ed.  Francof. 


ANTINOMIANS. CARPOCRATES. EPIPHANES. 


2S7 


i^rtyrtnxa.*  lie  endeavoured  apparently 
to  introduce  these  notions  into  the  Old 
Testament  by  an  allegorizing  mode  of  in- 
terpretation, an  example  of  wiiich  is  to 
be  found  in  his  explanation  of  Gen.  iii. 
21,  by  applying  it  to  the  material  bodies 
in  which  fallen  souls  are  clothed. 

Such  also  were  the  persons  who,  after 
a  certain  Severus,  called  themselves  Seve- 
riani,  of  whom  we  know  nothing  more 
than  that  they  rejected  tlie  epistles  of  St. 
Paul  and  the  acts  of  the  AposUes.  The 
first  of  these  circumstances  might  lead  us 
to  suppose  that  they  were  derived  from 
the  Jewish  Christians :  but  this  cannot 
be  considered  as  a  proof,  because  it  is 
also  possible  that,  instead  of  taking  refuge 
in  forced  and  arbitrary  interpretations,  in 
order  to  bring  the  authority  of  those 
writings  into  harmony  witli  their  own 
principles,  they  found  it  an  easier  plan  to 
throw  away  those  writings  entirely  and  at 
once.j 

(f.)  Eclectic  Jlniinomiaa  Gnostics;  Carpo- 
crates  and  EpipUanes,  Prodicians,  Antitacti, 
JSicolaitiviis,  Simonians. 

As  on  the  one  hand,  we  observe  a  ten- 
dency of  Gnosis  to  a  strict  asceticism^ 
which  opposes  itself  to  Judaism  as  to  a 
sensuous  and  carnal  religion, — so  we  re- 
mark, on  the  other,  that  it  has  also  a  ten- 
dency to  a  wicked  antinomianism,  which, 
confusing  Christian  freedom  and  unbridled 
license,  set  Christianity  in  opposition  not 
only  to  the  killing  letter  of  a  law,  whose 
commands  are  outwardly,  but  to  the  very 
inward  nature  of  the  law  itself,  and  which 
therefore,  contended  against  Judaism,  and 
witli  Judaism  also  against  all  moral  law, 
as  a  thing  too  limiting  for  the  inward  life, 
and  as  proceeding  from  the  limited  and 
limiting  Demiurgos.  This  was  a  misun- 
derstanding against  which  St.  Paul  had 
given  warning,  when  he  developed  the 
doctrine  of  Christian  freedom.^  We  re- 
cognise in  this  a  pantheistic  mysticism, 
which  opposed  itself  under  various  forms 
to  the  popular  religions  of  the  East,  which 
had  now  mingled  itself  with  the  doctrines 
of  the  Greek  philosophers  of  Alexandria, 
in  consequence  of  the  then  intermixture 
of  Oriental  and  western  modes  of  tliought, 
and  which  imagined  that  in  Chrisitianily, 
as  a  common  religion  for  all  mankind, 
which  destroyed  the  Jewish  exclusiveness, 


and  the  old  popular  religions,  it  could  fnul 
a  point  on  which  it  might  engraft  itself. 
Suck  an  antinomian  Gnosis  is  shown  in 
the  system  of  Carpocrates  and  his  son 
Epiphanes.  The  first  probably  lived  in 
the  reign  of  tlie  emperor  Hadrian,  at 
Alexandria,  where,  at  tliat  time,  there  was 
a  religious  eclecticism  which  had  struck 
the  emperor  himself*  Me  laid  out  a  sys- 
tem of  religion,  whicli  was  propagated 
and  extended  by  his  son  Epiphanes,  a 
young  man,  who,  by  the  perverse  turn  of 
mind  given  to  him  by  his  father,  had 
abused  great  talents,  but  who  died  in  the 
seventeenth  year  of  his  age.  As  Clement 
of  Alexandria  says,  Carpocrates  had  busied 
himself  much  with  tlie  Platonic  philoso- 
phy, and  had  instructed  his  son  in  it. 
The  Platonic  notions  of  the  pre-existence 
of  souls  of  higher  knowledge,  as  being  the 
remembrance  brought  from  a  former  exist- 
ence in   heaven,   are  prominent  parts   in 

j  this  system ;  and  the  originators  of  this 
system    seem    to    have    appropriated    to 

j  themselves  much  out  of  the  Phscdrus  of 

j  Plato.  They  made  their  Gnosis  to  consist 
in  the  recognition  of  one  supreme  first 
existence,!  from  which  all  being  proceeds, 
and  to  which  all  being  strives  to  return. 
The  finite  spirits,  which  had  rule  over  the 
individual  places  of  the  earth,  endeavoured 
to  counteract  this  universal  endeavour 
after  unity;  and  from  their  influence,  their 
laws,  and  their  institutions,  proceeded 
every  thing  which   restrains,  every  thing 

j  which  destroys  and  checks,  the  original 
and  fundamental  connection,;];  which  is 
found  in  nature,  considered  as  the  revela- 
tion of  that  Supreme  Unity.  These  spirits 
endeavour  to  retain  unden  their  subjection 
those  souls,  which,  having  flowed  from 
out  of  the  Supreme  Unity  are  akin  to  it, 
but  have  sunk  down  into  the  material 
woild,  and  are  imprisoned  in  the  body, 
so  as  to  compel  tliem,  after  death,  to  enter 
into  new  bodies,  and  to  ren(U;r  them 
unable  to  raise  themselves  up  in  freedom 
to  their  original  source.  From  these  limit- 
ing spirits  of  the  world  proceed  all  popu- 
lar religions.  But  those  souU,  which  by 
the  remembrance  they  retain  of  their  for- 
mer higher  condition,  elevate  themselves 
to  the  contemplation  of  that  Supreme 
Unity,  attain  the  true  freedom  and  tran- 


•  Clom.  Strom,  lib.  i.  320.    [Sylb.  p.  138.  Pot- 
ter, p.  378.     Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  71.] 
\  Tlieodoret.  hseret.  fall.  i.  21 
%  Galat.  V.  13.  et  alibi. 


•  See  his  Letter  to  the  consul  Servianus  in  Flavii 
Vopisci  Vita  Saturnini,  c.  ii.  Illi,  qui  Serapin 
colunt,  Christiiini  sunt  ct  devoti  sunt  Serapi,  qui 
se  Ckr/sli  EpLscupos  dicunt. 

-|-  Ifencc,  comes  the  phrase^i/aKTc  ^cuj/jtH,  which 
occurs  ill  (element  of  Alcxiin  Iria. 

^  [Gemeinschaft,  communion,  common  nature.] 


288 


quillity,  which  nothing  again  can  limit  or 
destroy,  and  such  souls  raise  themselves 
above  the  popular  gods  and  popular  reli- 
gions. They  considered  a  Pythagoras,  a 
Plato,  and  an  Aristotle,  among  the  heathen, 
to  belong  to  this  class  of  men,  and  Jesus  j 
among  the  Jews.  To  him  they  ascribed 
only  a  peculiarly  pure  and  powerful  soul,  | 
bv  means  of  which,  through  reminis-1 
cences  brouglitfrom  his  former  existence,  I 
he  raised  himself  up  to  the  loftiest  contem- 1 
plation,  freed  himself  from  the  limiting  j 
laws  of  the  Jewish  God,  and  destroyed  j 
the  religion  which  had  been  established  1 
hy  that  God,  although  he  himself  was  \ 
brought  up  in  it.  By  his  union  with  the; 
fjiova-^  he  obtained  Divine  power,  in  virtue 
of  which  he  was  able  to  triumph  over  the 
spirits  of  the  world,  and  the  laws  which 
they  had  imposed  on  nature,  to  perform  i 
miracles,  and  to  endure  suflerings  in  un-; 
disturbed  tranquillity.  By  this  divine 
power  he  was  afterwards  enabled  in  free- 
dom to  raise  himself  up  again  to  the  Su-I 
preme  Unity,  beyond  the  power  of  the ! 
spl.^its  of  the  world.  Thus  this  sect  put' 
no  difference  between  Christ  and  other! 
sages  of  all  nations ;  they  taught  that ; 
every  other  soul  also  which  could  elevate 
itself  to  the  same  height  of  contemplation, 
was  to  be  put  on  the  same  level  with 
Christ.  This  sect  hardly  deserved  the 
name  of  a  Christian  sect,  since  they  only 
appropriated  to  themselves  some  proposi- 
tions, taken  at  their  own  will  and  plea- 
sure, out  of  Christianity,  and  then  connect- 
ed them  with  other  ideas  totally  foreign 
to  them.  They  preverted,  after  their 
own  Pantheistic  mysticism,  the  assertions 
made  by  St  Paul  of  the  nothingness  of 
the  merit  of  works, and  about  justification, 
not  by  works,  but  by  faith;  for  under  the 
name  of  faith  they  understood  nothing 
but  that  mystical  brooding  over  the  ab- 
sorption of  the  spirit  into  the  original 
Unity.  It  needs  only  faith  and  love,  they 
said ;  all  outward  things  are  indifferent ; 
he  who  introduces  a  moral  meaning  into 
outward  things,  makes  himself  dependent 
upon  them,  and  remains  subject  to  the 
dominion  of  the  spirits  of  the  world,  from 
whom  all  religious,  moral,  and  political 
ordinances  are  derived,  he  cannot  raise 
himself  up  after  his  death,  out  of  the  mere 
circle  of  Metempsychosis.  But  he  who 
gives  himself  up  to  all  kinds  of  pleasure, 
without  being  affected  by  it,  and  so  des- 
pises the  laws  of  those  spirits  of  tlie  world, 
he  raises  himself  up  to  union  with  the 
One  First  Ihin<^^  with  whom,  being 
already  united  here  below,  he  has  made 


ABOMINABLE  ANTINOMIANISM. 


himself  free  from  all  that  can  limit  his 
nature*  Epiphanes  wrote  a  book  on 
righteousness,  wherein  he  carries  out  the 
principle,  that  universal  nature  reveals  a 
struggle  after  unity  and  communion  \  and 
that  the  laws  of  men,  which  are  against 
this  law  of  nature,  but  which  are  unable 
to  conquer  the  desires  planted  by  the 
Creator  himself  in  tlie  heart  of  man,  first 
produced  sin.  Thus  did  he  pervert  what 
St.  Paul  had  said  of  the  insufficiency  of 
the  law  to  make  man  holy,  and  of  its  ob- 
ject, viz.  to  call  forth  the  consciousness 
of  guilt,  in  order  that,  with  profligate 
pride,  he  might  despise  the  ten  command- 
ments. These  sects  used  to  traffic  much 
in  magical  arts,  which  they  deduced  from 
tlie  power  of  their  union  with  the  First 
One,  who  is  victorious  over  all  the  world- 
spirits  ;  they  worshipped  an  image  of 
Christ,  which  was  said  to  have  come  from 
Pilate,  together  with  the  images  of  heathen 
philosophers,  who,  like  Christ,  had  raised 
themselves  above  the  popular  religion ; 
and  they  worshipped  it  with  heathen  cere- 
monies, which  latter  certainly  were  not 
in  accordance  with  the  system  of  Carpo- 
crates  and  Epiphanes,  but  proceeded  from 
the  superstition  of  their  followers.  At 
Same,  the  chief  town  of  the  island  of  Ce- 
phalonia,  in  the  Ionian  sea,  from  which  the 
maternal  ancestors  of  Epiphanes  were 
sprung,  this  young  man  is  supposed  to 
have  made  so  great  an  impression  on  the 
multitude,  that  they  erected  a  temple,  a 
museum,  and  altars  to  him,  and  offered 
him  divine  worship.  As  Clement  of 
Alexandria,^  a  writer  by  no  means  of 
great  credulity,  relates  this  circumstance, 
which  appears  by  no  means  incredible,  if 
we  take  into  account  the  circumstances 
of  those  times,  we  have  no  reason  to  doubt 
the  fact.  But,  perhaps,  it  was  only  some 
members  of  this  sect,  which  might  have 
found  peculiar  success  on  the  island  ;  who 
offered  this  honour  to  him,  as  one  of  the 
greatest  sages.J 


*  Iren.  i.  25. 

f  Strom,  ill.  428.  [Sylb.  p.  183-4.  Potter, 
p.  511.     Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  214-15.] 

t  The  spiritof  these  antinomian,  eclectic  Gnos- 
tics, who  arbitrarily  jumbled  together  all  religions, 
and  all  systems  of  philosophy,  in  which  they  could 
find  a  point  whereon  to  fix  their  own  sy.stem,  as 
they  might  do  in  separate  tenets  detached  from 
that  with  which  they  are  connected,  is  shown  in 
a  marked  manner  in  two  inscriptions  which  were 
found  very  lately  in  the  territory  of  Cyrene,  and 
which  prove  the  propagation  of  this  sect  to  have 
lasted  till  the  sixth  century.  They  were  published 
and  explained  by  Gescnius  in  his  Christmas  thesis, 
1825,  [in  dem  Weihnachtsprogramn:i.] 


PRODICIANS. — NICOLAITANS. 


To  these  unbridled  Jintinomians  be- 
longs the  sect  of  the  Antitacti  (whose 
fundamental  principle  it  was  to  set  them- 
selves in  opposition  to  the  Demiurgos,  or 
the  God  of  tiie  Jews,  who  had  sown  evil, 
imperfection,  and  weeds,  among  the  works 
of  the  Father  of  good,*)  and  the  Prodi- 
cians,  the  followers  of  a  certain  Prodicus. 
These  last  maintained  that  they,  as  sons 
of  the  Supreme  God,  and  as  the  royal 
race,  were  bound  to  no  law',  because  for 
the  king  there  was  no  written  law;  and 
hence  they  were  lords  of  the  Sabbath, 
lords  over  all  ordinances.  They  appa- 
rently placed  the  worship  of  God  only  in 
the  inward  contemplation  of  the  Divine 
nature;  they  rejected  praver,  and  probably 
all  external  worship,  as  fit  only  for  puny 
spirits,  who  were  still  under  the  dominion 
of  the  Demiurgos;  and  they  appealed  to 
apocryphal  writings  that  went  under  the 
name  of  Zoroastcr.'f 


The  first  of  them,  in  which  the  sect  conceals 
itself  under  general  expressions,  which  may,  how- 
ever, be  taken  in  an  innocent  sense,  ascribes  the 
following  words  to  Simon  of  Cyrene,  whom  the 
pseudo-Basilidians,  who  had  the  same  sentiments, 
made  a  subject  of  their  fictions :  <pu6  (Hermes 
Trismegistus,  under  whose  name  there  exist  spu- 
rious writings  containing  much  Gnosticism,)  Kpovo^, 
Zai^caiTTpiif,  Uu^xyo^^c,  ETrwjue^o;,  M^a^Suivic.  (Mas- 
dek,  the  founder  of  a  Persian  sect  in  the  time  of 
the  Emperor  Justinian,  who  appears,  like  Prodi- 
cus, to  have  drawn  from  apocryphal  writings  that 
went  under  Zoroaster's  name.  See  Gesenius,  1.  c. 
p.  17.)  'laxfwc,  X^/3-Tcc  T=  X.1U  ol  >i//.m^ct  Kcupx- 
vaucot  KiBttynTAt,  (with  which  last  Clement  1.  c.  p. 
722,  also  classes  Prodicus,)  a-vy.'^m'ui^  iv^-iKXaiTiv 
hutv  /AnSiv  clKitc7r.ii:T6v,  tck  J'i  v./xoK  i^piiyiiv,  (f/'Cy 
nnderatood  hy  these  words,  according  to //jeir  sense 
of  them,  the  vc^oc  ci^-ca^ii?,  which  is  derived  from 
the  Supreme,  is  implanted  in  nature,  and  strives 
after  communion  and  unity,  with  which  (i.  e.  the 
ro/uo;  ay^jiaoc)  the  separating  and  limiting  ordi- 
nances of  the  Demiurgos,  the  spirits  of  the  world 
and  of  men,  are  at  variance,)  km  tuv  ;rag*yo//jxv  Ku.rx- 
TToXi/uiiv.  T:uTi  yjf,  «  TXi  SiK^arun;  Triiyn  (Jwxt:o-wn 
here  has  the  meaning  of  the  divine  natural  justice, 
founded  on  that  v://i?  feaoc,  on  which  Epiphancs 
wrote  a  treatise,)  touto  to  fAayLi^im:  h  ic.ivyi  (Jw. 

The  other  inscription,  in  which  the  sect  comes 
forward  without  disguise,  is  in  the  following  terms : 
ii  TTUs-aiv  cixrui^v  Kut  yvi-Jnnm  xi«:T;)?  7ri\yit  t«c  6a*c  'utti 
iiKiwiruvK,  tl^xvM  n  TSXa:£  tci;  rcu  rvaxcu,  o^k<.u  iKKtt- 
TOK  iyiAoK  uvifAo-n,  cJc  Zagst/jic  ts  km  ni/Saj-c^xc, 
Ta)v  ti^c<^Avrcev  (ftrvA,  Kuvri  <7vfA^:aniiii  (rt/v.fVTo.  We 
cannot,  however,  exactly  maintain  more  decidedly, 
that  these  inscriptions  proceed  from  the  sect  of 
Carpocratians,  because  so  many  similar  sects,  as 
the  Prodicians,  the  pseudo-Basilidians,  the  Nico- 
laitans,  &c. ,  had  the  same  principles. 

*     To  LvTlTX^^iTb-JU. 

f  Clem.  Strom,  i.  304.  [Sylb.  p.  13 f.  Potter, 
p.  357.  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  50;]  iii.  438.  [Sec  Sylb. 
p.  189,  et  seq.  Potter,  p.  526,  et  seq.  Klotz,  vol.  ii. 
p.  230.]  vii.  722.  [Sylb.  p.  306-7.  Potter,  p. 
854-5 ;  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  236.1 

37 


289 


To  this  family  of  Gnostics  belong  also 
the  Nicolaitans,  if  the  existence  of  any 
such  sect  can  be  proved.  Irenaeus,  indeed, 
names  such  a  sect  as  existing  in  his  time, 
deducing  them  from  Nicolaus  the  deacon 
I  mentioned  in  the  Acts,  and  he  believed 
that  he  found  their  portraiture  in  the 
,  second  chapter  of  the  Revelations.*  But 
[  it  may  be  tloubted  whetlier  Irenajus  has 
really  penetrated  the  meaning  of  the 
Revelations  in  this  case,  and  whether  the 
I  name  of  Nicolaitans  is  the  proper  name 
I  of  a  sect,  and  still  farther,  whether  it  is 
{  the  name  of  a  Gnostic  sect.  The  passage 
relates  to  such  persons  as  seduced  the 
Christians  to  partake  in  the  heathen  feasts 
'  at  a  sacrifice,  and  the  excesses  consequent 
upon  them,  as  the  Jews  had  formerly  suf- 
fered themselves  to  be  seduced  by  the 
I  Aloabites.  (Num.  xxv.)  The  name  of 
Nicolaitans  might  also  be  a  merely  sym- 
bolical name,  as  such  an  usage  of  it  would 
suit  very  well  with  the  whole  character 
of  the  Revelations :  "  destroyer  of  the 
people,"  "  seducer  of  the  people,"  like 
Balaam,  and  thus  Nicolaitans  might  mean 
Balaamites  in  this  senscj  Now  it  was  a 
favourite  idea  with  Irena;us,  that  the 
apostle  St.  John  had  actually  contended 
with  many  different  sorts  of  Gnostics; 
and  he  was  in  the  habit  of  searching  for 
remarks  which  were  meant  to  oppose  the 
Gnostics,  in  the  writings  of  St.  John.  As 
he  found  several  of  those  errors,  which 
are  blamed  in  the  Revelations,  among  the 
Gnostics  of  his  own  day,  he  concluded 
that  the  practical  errors  contended  against 
by  the  Apostle  had  also  had  their  founda- 
tion in  a  theoretical  Gnosticism,  and  the 
name  induced  him  to  deduce  them  from 
the  well  known  Nicolaus.  But,  in  fact, 
we  find  in  Irena;us  only  such  indefinite 
expressions  in  regard  to  this  sect,  that  it 
by  no  means  follows  necessarily  that  he 
wrote  from  any  decided  view  of  them.  If 
we  had  only  the  account  given  by  Irenreus, 
we  must  acknowledge  it  as  possible  that 
the  story  of  this  sect  may  have  arisen 
solely  out  of  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
Revelations.  Although  it  might  then  sur- 
prise us  that  Ireneeus,  widiout  any  ex- 


•  Irenteus  i.  26.  This  refers  to  their  practical 
errors:  qui  indiscrete  (uSioip-.pai;)  vivunt. — In  loc. 
cit.  11,  he  speaks  of  their  sfioculative  errors,  but 
he  does  not  altogether  separate  them  from  other 
Gnostics,  in  order  to  bring  forward  what  is  pecu- 
liar to  them. 

f  Balaam,  that  is,  v/x'Aasc;  according  to  the 
etymology  which  deduces  this  name  from  V'^Il 
and  D^- 

2B 


290 


NICOLAITANS. glMONIANS. 


ternal  evidence  to  induce  him,  should  have 
made  a  man,  distinguished  by  having  a 
public  office  coni'erred  on  liim  by  the 
apostles,  the  founder  of  a  heretical  sect. 
But  such  a  mistake  could  never  be  laid 
to  the  charge  of  that  learned  Alexandrian 
Clement,  an  unprejudiced  man,  and  one 
accustomed  to  historical  criticism;  and 
he  appeals  to  facts  which  could  not  have 
been  invented.  There  v\^ere  people  who 
had  the  corrupt  principles  which  we  have 
mentioned  before,  viz.  that  man  must 
conquer  his  desires  by  giving  himself  up 
to  them  and  not  allowing  himself  to  be 
affected  by  them,  and  that  he  must  abuse 
his  flesh  and  annihilate  it  by  its  own 
instrumentality,  in  order  to  show  his  con- 
tempt for  it:  their  motto  was  words  to 
this  effect,  which  they  ascribed  to  the 
deacon  Nicolaus.*  The  same  Clement 
afterwards,  in  another  passage,  quotes 
another  trait  out  of  the  life  of  this  Nico- 
iaus,  which  this  sect  used  in  order  to 
justify  their  own  excesses.!  The  apos- 
tles, it  would  seem,  had  reproached  him 
with  his  jealousy  about  his  wife,  and  in 
order  to  show  how  little  this  reproof 
would  attach  to  him  he  brought  her  for- 
ward and  said,  "  Let  him  that  will,  marry 
her."  But  Clement  was  far  from  holding 
JSTicolaus  to  be  the  founder  of  this  sect, 
although  the  sect  itself  claimed  him.  He 
clears  the  character  of  that  man  of  the 
Apostolic  Church,  and  quotes  the  tradi- 
tion, that  this  Nicolaus  lived  in  unspotted 
wedlock  to  the  end  of  his  days,  and  left 
children,  whose  conduct  was  irreproach- 
able, behind  him.  We  see,  therefore,  that 
Irenaeus  did  not  err  in  sufposlnq  the  ex- 
istence of  Slick  a  sect,  but  only  in  not 
examining  more  carefully  its  pretences. 
It  was  the  fashion  for  such  sects,  as  we 
have  often  before  remarked,  to  engraft 
themselves  to  some  great  man  or  other 
of  antiquity,  in  tlieir  choice  of  whom  they 
were  often  guided  by  accidental  circum- 
stances. Thus  the  Nicolaitans  made  Nico- 
laus, the  deacon,  their  founder,  without 
any  fault  of  his.  Clement  thought  that 
they  had  only  corrupted  liis  words  and 
actions  in  a  perverted  manner,  and  he 
endeavours  to  explain  both  one  and  the 
other  in  a  more  favourable  mode;  but 
one  is  led  to  inquire  whether  Clement 
has  viewed  it  in  a  sufficiently  critical 
manner.     All  which  is  here  ascribed  to 

*  To  Jiiv  7rai>n^p»<rci3-Qet:  tm  a-jfKi,     Strom,  ii.  p. 
411. 

f  Strom,  ill.  p.  436. 


Nicolaus  bears  a  very  apocryphal  stamp 
upon  it;  and  perhaps,  that  sect  had  a  life 
of  that  Nicolaus,  in  which  all  this  was 
found,  put  together  by  themselves  or  by 
others  from  fictions  and  unauthentic  tra- 
ditions. If  this  sect  be  not  the  same 
which  was  in  existence  in  the  apostolic 
times,  a  point  which  cannot  be  decided 
with  certainty,*  the  name  of  the  Nico- 
laitans in  the  Apocalypse  may  have  in- 
duced the  later  sect  to  name  itself  after 
Nicolaus.  But  as  they  probably  belonged 
to  the  party  of  anti-Judaizers,  and  there- 
fore, acknowledge  only  St.  Paul  as  an 
apostle,  they  would  also  be  induced  by 
what  they  read  in  the  Apocalypse  to 
maintain  the  antiquity  of  their  sect,  as 
one  which  the  Judaizing  St.  John  had 
opposed;  and  the  name  induced  thera 
naturally  to  deduce  it  (i.  e.  the  sect)  from 
that  Nicolaus.  We  have  before  found 
instances  in  which  the  Gnostics  chose 
for  their  founders  persons  who  appear  in 
an  unfavourable  light  either  in  the  Old  or 
the  New  Testament.    • 

The  Simon ians  are  also  to  be  mentioned 
here,  an  eclectic  sect,  which  it  is  difficult 
to  bring  into  any  one  definite  class,  be- 
cause they  appear  to  have  attached  them- 
selves, sometimes  to  heathenism,  some- 
times to  Judaism,  or  to  the  religious  opi- 
nions of  the  Samaritans ;  and  appear  to  have 
been  sometimes  strict  ascetics,  sometimes 
wild  despisers  of  all  moral  laws  (the  Enty- 
chites.)  Simon  Magus  was  their  Christ, 
or  at  least  a  form  assumed  by  the  redeem- 
ing spirit  which  had  appeared  also  in 
Christ,  whether  it  was  that  in  their  first 
origin  they  had^  really  proceeded  from  the 
party  founded  *by  that  Goeta  (magician,) 
mentioned  in  the  Acts,  or  whether  the 
sect  which  arose  later,  merely  to  please 
their  own  fancies,  had  made  Simon  Magus, 
whom  the  Christians  abominated,  their 
CoryphiEus,  aiul  had  forged  under  his 
name  pretended  books  relating  to  the 
higher  wisdom.  What  some  learned  men 
liave  supposed,  viz.  that  another  Simon, 
distinct  from  that  old  Simon  Magus, 
founded  their  sect,  and  that  he  was  con- 
fused with  that  older  Simon  Magus,  is  too 
arbitrary  a  supposition,  and  is  by  no  means 


*  Even  supposing  that  tlie  name  Nicolaitans 
in  tlic  Apocalypse  should  be  really  the  proper 
name  of  a  parly  founded  by  a  person  named 
Nicolaus,  and  tliat  the  mere  existence  of  the  name 
there  had  given  occasion  for  allusions  to  Balaam, 
it  would  still  not  be  a  necessary  deduction  from 
these  premises  that  this  party  which  was  then  in 
existence  was  a  Gnostic  sect. 


291 


required  for  the  elucidation  of  the  liisto- 
rical  phenomenon  presented  to  us* 

(g-.)  Marcion  and  his  Scliool. 

Marcion  forms  the  most  natural  close 
to  the  series  of  the  Gnostics,  because  he 
belongs  to  the  Gnostics  only  07i  one  side-, 
and,  on  another,  rather  forms  a  contrast  to 
them  :  he  stands  on  the  boundary  between 


•  This  Simon  Magus,  to  whom  properly  no 
place  belongs  among  the  founders  of  the  Chriaiian 
sects,  has  obtained  an  undeserved  importance  in 
the  old  Church,  by  being  made  the  father  of  the 
Gnostic  sects.  As  the  representative  of  the  whole 
thcosophico-goctic  character,  in  opposition  to  the 
simple  faith  in  revelation,  he  has  become  in  the 
same  manner  a  mythical  personage,  and  given 
rise  to  many  fables ;  as,  for  instance,  that  of  his 
disputation  with  St.  Peter,  and  his  unhappy  at- 
tempt at  the  art  of  flying ;  and  the  Ckiitcntine 
is  the  place  where  the  fable  is  most  ingeniously 
conducted.  But  it  was  an  extraordinary  circum- 
stance that  Justin  Martyr,  in  his  second  apology 
before  the  Roman  emperor,  should  appeal  to  the 
fact,  that  there  was  a  statue  at  Rome  to  this 
Simon  Magus,  on  an  island  in  the  Tiber,  (jv  to, 
Ti^ipt  TT'.TJ-fjtu)  ui^a^u  Tttv  /i/3  jf^i/f&v)  with  the  m- 
scriplion,  Simoni  Deo  Sancto.  Although  such 
GoetfE  at  that  time  found  much  acceptance  even 
with  the  highest  classes,  yet  one  can  hardly  be- 
lieve that  it  could  have  amounted  to  the  erection 
of  such  a  statue  and  to  a  decree  of  the  senate, 
by  which  Simon  Magus  was  received  into  the 
number  of  the  Dii  Romani.  We  should  be 
obliged  to  question  the  correctness  of  Justin's 
assertion,  even  if  we  were  not  able  to  explain  the 
cause  of  his  error.  But  this  seems  now  to  be  as- 
certained, as  in  the  year  1574,  at  the  place  desig- 
nated by  Justin  Martyr,  a  stone  was  dug  up,  which 
seemed  to  have  been  the  pedestal  of  a  statue,  and 
it  bore  the  inscription,  "  Semoni  Sanco  Deo  Fidio 
Sacrum."  Now  certainly  this  statue  was  not 
erected  by  the  Roman  senate  or  emperor,  but  by 
one  Sextus  Pompeius;  but  Justin,  full  of  the  his- 
tories then  current  about  Simon  Magus,  over- 
looked this,  and  confused  the  Scmo  Sancus  (a 
Sabine  Roman  deity,  which  might  have  remained 
unknown  to  Justin,  well  acquainted  with  the 
Greek,  but  not  with  the  Roman  mythology,)  with 
Simo  Sanctus,  especially  as  in  the  surname  of  that 
deity  Sanctus  was  sometimes  written  instead  of 
Sancus.  Tertullian,  indeed,  as  better  acquainted 
with  the  Roman  antiquities,  might  have  been  able 
to  form  a  better  judgment  on  the  matter,  but  in 
such  cases  he  was  too  prejudiced,  and  too  little 
inclined  to  the  critical  art,  to  investigate  any  far- 
ther an  account  which  was  to  his  own  taste,  and 
came  also  from  a  man  of  reputation.  The  more 
critical  Alexandrians  do  not  mention  the  circum- 
stance, and  Origen,  lib.  i.  contr.  Cels.  c.  57,  by  say- 
ing that  the  name  of  Simon  Magus  was  known 
beyond  Palestine  only  to  the  Christians,  who 
knew  him  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  seems 
himself  to  stamp  the  story  of  a  statue  erected  to 
him  at  Rome  as  a  fiction.  The  Samaritan  Goetaj 
and  founders  of  sects,  DosUheu.i  and  Mcntmder, 
(who  is  made  out  to  be  a  disciple  of  Simon 
Magus,)  are  even  less  deserving  still  of  any  par- 
ticular mention  in  a  history  of  Christian  sects. 


the  Gnostic  turn  of  mind,  where  specula- 
tion was  the  prevailing  characteristic,  and 
a  character  of  mind  tlioroughly  opposed 
to  speculative  Gnosticism.  Christian  feel- 
ing is  far  more  appealed  to  by  him  than 
by  other  Gnostics,  because  his  whole  being 
was  far  more  deeply  rooted  in  Chris- 
tianity, because  Christian  feeling  was  the 
keynote  of  his  whole  inward  life,  and  his 
whole  religious  and  theological  character, 
wliile  among  the  rest  of  the  Gnostics  this 
(although  sometimes  the  prevailing  turn 
of  mind,)  formed  only  one  of  the  dispo- 
sitions belonging  to  them,  and  was  inter- 
mixed with  much  of  a  diflerent  character. 
It  is  instructive  to  mark  how  an  endea- 
vour, which  proceeded  from  the  very 
depths  of  Christianity,  could  receive  aix 
unchristian  turn  by  means  of  a  gross 
partiality ;  it  is  a  warning  and  a  startling 
circumstance  to  see  a  man,  whose  errors 
themselves  were  connected  with  a  spirit 
of  love,  only  that  it  was  a  mistaken  spirit, 
and  a  man,  to  witom  the  Christ  who  filled 
his  heart  was  one  and  all,  misunderstood 
and  called  a  heretic  by  most  of  the  Chris- 
tians of  his  own  day,  because  they  were 
unable  to  understand  /;/smode  of  concep- 
tion, and  indeed,  chiefly  by  those  who 
might  have  dwelt  iu  the  most  intimate 
communion  with  him,  in  virtue  of  that 
which  they  bore  within  their  hearts,  if 
any  other  mode  of  communication  had 
existed  besides  those  of  words  and  de- 
finite ideas,  (begrifl":)  any  other  mode 
than  that  which  is  only  a  dim  reflec- 
tion of  the  inward  life, — a  source  of  so 
many  misunderstandings  and  mutual  mis- 
takes among  men,  which  would  be  re- 
moved if  one  man  could  read  the  inward 
life  and  conscience  of  another!  What 
Marcion  had  in  common  with  the  Gnos- 
tics, and  particularly  in  common  with  the 
Gnostics  of  this  class,  was  partly  the  dis- 
tinction which  he  made  between  the  God 
of  nature  and  of  the  Old  Testament,  and 
the  God  of  tlie  Gospel,  and  the  distinction 
between  the  Divine  and  the  human  gen- 
erally, as  well  as  many  speculative  ele- 
ments, which  he  connected  with  his  sys- 
tem of  religion.  And  yet  he  had  evidently 
arrived  at  tliat  which  he  had  in  common 
with  them  by  an  entirely  diflerent  road. 
It  was  in  Clirist  that  he  first  found  his 
God ;  and  that  glory  of  God  which  had 
revealed  itself  to  him  in  Christ,  he  was 
never  able  to  find  again  in  nature  and  in 
history.  The  spenilative  elements,  which 
he  borrowed  from  other  Gnostics,  were 
to  him  only  neces.sary  aids  to  fill  up  the 
gaps  which  his  system,  being  founded  on 


MARCION   NO    PRESUMPTUOUS    CHRISTIAN. 


292 


an  entirely  different  and  a  ivholly practical 
plan,  would  necessarily  have.  It  was 
evidently  not  his  intention,  like  that  of 
other  Gnostics,  that  Christianity  should 
be  completed  by  means  of  the  speculative 
conclusions  of  other  doctrinal  systems, 
but  he  wished  originally  only  to  restore 
again  to  its  purity  Cliristianity,  which 
had,  in  his  opinion,  been  adulterated  by 
admixtures  foreign  to  its  nature.  The 
partial  point  of  view,  from  which  he  set 
out  with  this  disposition,  was  the  occa- 
sion of  most  of  his  errors. 

He  did  not  make  a  secret  doctrine  the 
source  of  the  knowledge  of  this  genuine 
Christianity ;  but  he  would  not  suffer 
himself  to  be  bound  by  a  general  Church 
tradition.,  because,  in  his  opinion,  foreign 
matter  had  already  mixed  itself  in  such 
a  tradition  with  pure  Apostolic  Chris- 
tianity. As  a  genuine  Protestant  (if  we 
may  transfer  to  an  ancient  day  this  appel- 
lation which  arose,  indeed,  later,  but  de- 
noted a  genuine  primitive  Christian  turn 
of  mind,)  he  wished  to  consider  the  word 
of  Christ  and  of  his  genuine  disciples 
[i.  e.  original  apostles,  Tr.]  the  only 
valid  source  of  a  knowledge  of  the  true 
Gospel.  He  certainly,  instead  of  recog- 
nising the  many-sidedness  of  Christianity 
from  the  variety  of  the  instruments  se- 
lected for  its  propagation,  allowed  him- 
self to  make  an  arbitrary  division  between 
them,  founded  on  a  one-sided  view.  His 
endeavour  to  tind  the  genuine  documents 
of  pure  original  Christianity,  led  him  into 
historical  and  critical  investigations,  which 
were  far  removed  from  the  contemplative 
disposition  of  the  other  Gnostics.  But 
he  gives  us  here  a  warning  example,  how 
such  inquiries,  as  soon  as  they  are  swayed 
by  the  preconceived  doctrinal  opinions, 
in  which  the  tlioughts  are  fettered,  must 
lead  to  unhappy  results,  and  how  easily 
an  arbitrary  hypercriticism  is  formed  in 
opposition  to  an  uncritical  credulity ;  how 
easily,  in  short,  man,  in  struggling  against 
one  class  of  doctrinal  prejudices,  falls  into 
another. 

The  other  Gnostics  united  a  mystical 
allegorizing  interpretation  of  Scripture 
with  their  theosophic  idealism.  The 
single  hearted  Marcion  was  a  zealous 
enemy  of  this  artificial  mode  of  interpre- 
tation. He  was,  on  the  contrary,  a  warm 
adherent  of  the  literal  interpretation 
which  was  in  vogue  among  the  opponents 
of  the  Gnostics  ;  and  it  was  shown  in  his 
case,  how  even  this  mode  of  interpreta- 
tion, if  it  is  not  combined  with  other  her- 
meneutic  principles,  and  if  it  is  carried 


to  the  extreme,  must  lead  to  arbitrary 
results. 

The  opposition  between  Trurrn;  and 
yvua-ti,  between  an  exoteric  and  an  eso- 
teric Christianity,  belonged  to  the  essential 
attributes  of  the  other  Gnostic  systems ; 
but  it  was  impossible  that  such  an  oppo- 
sition could  be  recognised  by  Marcion, 
whose  attachment  was  chiefly  to  the 
practical  St.  Paul.  With  him  vis-tk;  was 
the  common  source  of  Divine  life  for  all 
Christians  ;  he  knew  nothing  higher  than 
the  illumination  which  all  Christians 
ought  to  have ;  that  which  he  recognised 
as  true  Christianity  was  to  be  known  and 
recognised  as  such  by  all  who  were  gene- 
rally capable  of  receiving  Christianity ; 
and  the  only  difference  he  could  make 
was  that  between  mature  Christians,  and 
those  who  still  needed  farther  instruction 
in  Christianity  (i.  e.  Catechumens.)  This 
characteristic  of  Marcion's  doctrine,  so 
wholly  unlike  the  usual  spirit  of  Gnos- 
ticism, leads  us  to  conclude  that  it  re- 
ceived its  development  also  in  a  wholly 
different  mode.  But,  alas,  we  have  no 
authentic  accounts  of  the  life  of  Marcion, 
so  as  to  enable  us  to  inquire  into  that 
point  satisfactorily.  Many  gaps  in  that 
life  can  only  be  filled  up  by  conjecture. 

He  was  born  in  Pontus  in  the  first  half 
of  the  second  century.  If  the  account 
of  Epiphanius  is  founded  in  fact,  his 
father  was  bishop  of  that  Church;  but 
even  then,  if  it  be  true,  it  is  still  most 
probable  that  he  was  elected  to  that  office 
when  Marcion  was  already  a  youth  or 
arrived  at  the  age  of  manhood ;  for  it  is 
most  probable,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
development  of  his  system,  that  Marcion 
lived  the  early  part  of  his  life  as  a  Hea- 
then, and  afterwards  turned  to  Christianity 
from  the  free  impulse  of  his  own  heart. 
Like  many  others,  he  felt  himself,  in  the 
first  glow  of  faith  and  love,  impelled  to 
renounce  every  thing  earthly ;  he  bestowed 
his  goods  or  a  part  of  them  on  the  Church, 
and  began  to  live*  as  a  continens  or  iax»)T»)?f 
in  strict  self-denial.  His  contempt  of  na- 
ture, which  was  at  first  only  of  a  j)ractical 
and  ascetic  kind,  proceeding  from  a  falsely 
conceived  opposition  between  the  natural 


*  Pecuniam  inpriinocalore  fidei  Ecclesia;  con- 
tulit.  TertuU.  adv.  Marcion.  lib.  iv.  c.  4.  When 
Epiphanius  calls  Marcion  a  fj.'jVJ.^u>v,  he  is  only 
making  a  confusion  between  the  circumstances  of 
his  own  and'  of  earlier  times ;  and  by  the  word 
^cva^^av  we  must  understand  an  do-*))T«,-.  Ephraem 
Syrus,  blames  Marcion  for  acquiring  a  delusive  re- 
putation through  his  asceticism.  0pp.  Ed.  Lat. 
Sermo  i.  p.  438,  and  seq. 

f  See  above. 


MARCION  S    ENMITY   TO   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


and  the  Divine,  might  now,  under  a  va- 
riety of  dilTerent  influences,  lead  a  man 
of  a  soul  so  impetuous  in  its  apprehen- 
sions and  so  abrupt  in  its  determinations 
as  his,  to  a  theoretically  conceived  sepa- 
ration between  the  God  of  nature  and  the 
God  of  the  Gospel.  Nature  appeared  so 
cold  and  stiff  to  his  heart,  filled  and 
glowing  widi  the  image  of  the  God  of 
love  and  mercy,  as  he  appeared  in  Christ. 
He  was,  doubtless,  right  in  the  belief 
that  the  contemplation  of  nature  cannot 
lead  to  the  knowledge  of  that  Father  of 
love  and  mercy;  he  was  right  in  his 
opposition  against  the  Deist,  who  sets  the 
preaching  of  nature  on  the  same  level 
with  that  of  the  Gospel,  and  who  finds  in 
nature  alone  and  by  itself  a  temple  of 
eternal  love ;  but  Marcion  was  always 
inclined  to  push  matters  to  the  extreme. 
Even  in  history,  Marcion,  full  of  the 
glory  of  the  Gospel,  thought  that  he  could 
find  no  trace  of  the  God  who  had  revealed 
himself  to  him  there,  (i.  e.  in  the  Gospel ;) 
he,  like  many  other  zealous  Christians, 
■would  look  back  into  the  heathen  vvorld 
only  with  horror,  and  it  appeared  to  him 
notliing  hut  the  kingdom  of  Satan;  but  even 
in  the  Old  Testament  he  could  not  find 
again  his  God  and  his  Christ;  his  fiery  and 
impatient  spirit,  which  was  too  deficient 
in  calmness  and  reflection,  to  be  able  pro- 
perly to  investigate  the  relation  between 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  was  now  at 
once  struck  with  the  contrast  between 
the  two  forms  of  religion.  He  had  no 
notion  of  a  gradual  (literally  pa?dagogical) 
development  of  the  Divine  revelation, 
and  Judaism  appeared  to  him  too  carnal 
to  have  proceeded  from  the  same  source 
as  the  spiritual  religion  of  Christianity : 
and  he  believed  that  that  same  God  of 
love,  of  mercy,  and  compassion,  whom 
he  knew  from  the  Gospel,  was  not  to  be 
recognised  here,  (i.  e.  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.) It  is  easy  to  see  that  (after  this 
nolion  of  the  contrast  between  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  had  once  be- 
come the  prevailing  idea  in  his  soul,)  if 
he,  standing  in  this  position,  considered 
the  Old  Testament,  he  would  be  able  to 
find  many  points  on  which  he  could  rest 
this  opinion.  We  must  add  also,  that,  ac- 
cording to  his  principles  of  a  thoroughly 
literal  interpretation  of  the  Bible,  he  be- 
lieved that  all  the  anthropomorphical  and 
anthropopathical  expressions  of  the  Old 
Testament  must  be  maintained  to  the 
very  letter,  without  distinguishing  the 
idea  from  the  dress  in  which  it  is  clothed. 
A  man  of  Marcion's  character  would 


293 

naturally  be  induced  by  opposition  only 
to  develope  himself  more  strikingly  in  his 
partial  views,  and  to  harden  himself  in 
them.  In  reality  he  had  to  contend  with 
such  an  opposition,  and  this  contention 
had,  no  doubt,  a  remarkable  influence  on 
the  formation  of  his  religious  and  doc- 
trinal views.  There  was,  in  existence,  to 
say  the  truth,  at  that  time,  particularly  in 
A^ia  Minor,  a  false  turn  of  mind,  which 
interpreted  the  Old  Testament  without 
sufficient  spirituality,  which  did  not  suf- 
ficiently distinguish  between  the  different 
positions  taken  in  the  two  dispensations, 
and  which  in  many  doctrines  (as,  for 
example,  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  king- 
dom, the  idea  of  a  millcnarian  kingdom,) 
mixed  up  a  carnal  Judaism  with  Chris- 
tianity. This  disposition  he  combated 
with  violent  zeal,  and  blamed,  not  wholly 
without  foundation,  those  who  were  its 
slaves  with  adulterating  the  Gospel,  and 
hence  there  might  easily  arise  in  his  mind 
a  suspicion  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
whole  traditional  system  of  the  Church, 
{■irapocSoat^,)  and  of  the  Biblical  documents 
which  he  had  received  from  that  tradition; 
and  hence,  also,  he  may  have  been  in- 
duced to  endeavour,  by  his  own  inquiries, 
to  form  for  himself  a  Christianity,  puri- 
fied from  all  that  was  foreign  to  its  na- 
ture. His  contention  with  this  too  Jewish 
disposition  then  drove  him  also  constandy 
to  conceive  the  contrast  between  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  more  and  more 
sharply,  and  in  many  things  to  suppose 
unjustly  that  Christianity  had  been  adul- 
terated by  Judaism.  This  enmity  of  his 
towards  the  Old  Testament,  and  many  of 
his  opinions  connected  with  it,  were,  pro- 
bably, the  cause  of  his  being  excommu- 
nicated at  Sinopc.  On  this  he  travelled 
to  Rome,  witli  a  view  of  seeking  whether 
he  could  not,  in  the  Church  of  the  me- 
tropolis of  the  world,  discover  friends  to 
his  opinions,  which,  he  was  fully  per- 
suaded, were  the  principles  of  genuine 
Christianity ;  and  the  numl)cr  of  anti- 
Jewish  feelings  then  prevailing  in  the 
Roman  Church*  migiit  give  him  hopes  of 
success.  If  the  account  of  Epiphanius 
is  to  be  relied  on,  JMarcion  must  have 
inquired  of  the  Roman  clergy  hov/  tlicy 
explained  the  passage  in  iMatt.  ix.  17,  in 
order  to  elicit  from  their  own  mouth  the 
avowal  dial  the  new  wine  of  Christianity 
cannot  be  poured  into  the  old  botdes 
of  Judaism  widiout  destroying  them. 
But  in  Rome  also  his  Dualism    in   the 


See  in  the  history  of  the  Cultus,  p.  300. 
2b2 


294 


MARCION   AT   ROME. 


doctrine  of  the  revelation  of  God  could 
meet  with  notliing  but  contradiction,  be- 
cause the  acknowledgment  of  the  one 
same  God  and  of  the  one  same  Revela- 
tion in  the  Old  and  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment was  a  portion  of  the  Catholic  doc- 
trine of  the  Church.  Rejected  here  also 
by  the  Church,  he  was  driven  into  form- 
ing his  anti-Church  dispositions  into  a 
firm  determinate  system,  and  founding  an 
independent  community.  Up  to  this  time 
his  system  had  been  only  founded  on 
practical  considerations :  the  conviction 
that  Christianity  had  appeared  in  human 
nature  as  something  wholly  new,  unex- 
pected, and  unforeseen  ;  that  it  had  com- 
municated to  human  nature  a  Divine  life, 
to  which  there  had  hitherto  been  nothing 
akin  in  man;  that  the  God,  who  appeared 
in  Christ,  had  never  before  revealed  him- 
self, either  by  nature,  by  reason,  or  by  the 
Old  Testament,  and  that  nothing  bore 
witness  to  him,  nothing  was  his  work  but 
Christianity; — this  was  the  conviction 
from  which  Marcion  set  out.  (Ft  may  be 
a  question,  whether  he  had  at  that  lime 
carried  out  his  system  farther  than  this.) 
But  these  persuasions,  proceeding  from 
his  inward  Christian  life,  must  have  led 
a  thinking  man  to  many  inquiries  which 
he  could  not  answer.  A  Gnostic  system 
would  be  able  to  fill  up  these  gaps  in  his 
doctrinal  views :  he  might  there  learn  to 
acknowledge  a  Demiurgos,  different  from 
the  perfect  God,  as  the  God  of  nature  and 
of  the  Old  Testament;  and  a  contempt 
lor  nature,  and  a  hatred  towards  matter, 
as  the  source  of  evil,  would  correspond 
to  his  ascetic  dispositions.  The  Syrimi 
Gnosis,  which,  as  we  have  remarked, 
maintained  these  points  very  definitely, 
would  naturally  suit  him  exactly.  And 
thus  it  happened  that  he  joined  himself 
to  one  Cerdo,  a  teacher  of  this  Gnosis, 
who  came  from  Antiochia,  and  he  bor- 
rowed from  him  the  principles  needed 
for  the  completion  of  his  dogmatical 
t;yst.eixi. 

The  very  nature  of  Marcion's  opinions 
necessarily  implied  that  he  would  labour 
for  the  propagation  of  his  princii)les  Avith 
more  zeal  and  activity  than  other  Gnos- 
tics ;  for,  while  others  believed  that  they 
could  impart  their  higlier  knowledge  only 
to  a  small  portion  of  Christian.*,  to  the 
spiritual,  Marcion,  on  the  contrary,  was 
persuaded  that  his  was  no  other  than  the 
original  Cliristian  doctrine,  which  ought 
to  belong  to  all  mankind ;  and  he  would, 
therefore,  feel  himself  impelled  to  com- 
municate to 'all  Christians   the  light  of 


truth  which  had  been  imparted  to  him. 
He,  therefore,  made  several  voyages ;  he 
spent  his  life  in  many  struggles  both  with 
Heathens  and  with  Christians  ;  to  be  hated 
and  to  suffer  he  considered  as  the  destina- 
tion of  Christians.  "  My  fellows  in  being 
hated,  my  fellow-sufferers,"  ((ry/*/*i£rot;jixE>ot 
KCii  ffvyrct\a.iiTu^oi,)  was  liis  usual  address 
to  his  disciples.*  Perhaps,  he  was  at 
Rome,  when  Polycarp,  the  aged  bishop  of 
Smyrna,  visited  Anicetus,  bishop  ofRome.f 
Marcion,  who,  in  his  youth,  apparently 
had  lived  on  terms  of  friendly  inter- 
course with  the  former,  and  saw  him 
again  now  after  a  long  lapse  of  years, 
went  up  to  him  and  addressed  him  thus, 
"  Dost  thou  remember  me,  Polycarp  .'" 
But  this  old  man,  otherwise  so  fidl  of 
charity,  refused  to  receive  none  but  the 
enemies  of  the  Gospel  into  his  kindly 
affections  ;  and  such  Marcion  appeared  to 
him,  for  he  was  unable  to  recognise  in 
him  the  Christian  character,  which  was 
in  fact  the  very  foundation  of  his  errors. 
He  answered  him,  therefore,  "  Yes ;  I 
know  the  first-born  of  Satan !"  Tertul- 
lianj  relates  that  Marcion  at  length  testi- 
fied his  regret  at  the  schism  which  had 
arisen  in  the  Church  ;  that  he  had  prayed 
to  be  again  received  into  the  communion 
of  the  Church,  and  that  this  prayer  had 
been  granted,  on  the  condition  that  he 
should  bring  back  to  the  Church  those 
who  had  been  seduced  away  by  him,  a 
condition  which  his  too  early  death  pre- 
vented him  from  fulfilling.  It  must  be 
avowed  that  we  cannot  implicitly  trust 
this  account,  nor  are  we  able  to  say 
whether  there  be  any  foundation  for  it  in 
truth  ;  nor  even  in  that  case,  what  founda- 
tion there  is.  Since  with  Marcion  every 
thing  proceeded  from  the  heart,  it  might 
easily  happen  that  while  he  sighed  after 
Christian  communion  and  perceived  the 
evil  consequences  of  schisms,  he  should 
at  last  be  softened  as  his  age  increased, 
and  should  seek  again  to  attain  peace  with 
the  majority  of  Christians. 

It  still  remains  for  us  to  consider  some- 
what more  closely  the  system  formed  by 
an  union  between  the  practical  disposi- 
tion of  Marcion,  and  the  Gnostic  princi- 
ples of  Cerdo.  In  its  fundamental  prin- 
ciples this  system  harmonized  with  the 
other  Gnostic  systems  of  this  second 
class,  only  with  the  distinction,  that  it 
was  always  made  pre-eminently  clear, 
that  he  conceived  every  thing  jnore  from 


•  TertuUian,  c.  M.  iv.  36.  iv.  9. 

•J-  See  above ;  t  Prtescript.  c.  30. 


JUSTICE   AND    HOLINESS    CONTRASTED. 


a  practical  than  from  a  speculative  point 
of  view,  and  that  he  was  not  so  deeply- 
interested  inwliat  was  merely  speculative. 
He  assumed  three  fundamental  princi- 
ples : — 

1.  A  iA»!,  which  had  existed  from  all 
eternity. 

2.  The  perfect^  almighty ,  holy  God; 
the  God  who  is  Eternal  Love,  the  Good, 
0  «7«99j,  who  alone  is  to  he  called  God 
in  any  proper  sense  ;  who,  in  virtue  of 
his  holy  essence,  cannot  come  into  any 
contact  whatever  with  matter  ;  who  forms 
only  through  communication  of  himself 
a  lite  akin  to  himself,  and  does  not  act  on 
that  which  is  without. 

3.  The  Deminrgos,  a  subordinate  Be- 
ing, of  limited  power,  standing  between 
good  and  evil,  who  is  named  a  God  only 
in  an  improper  sense  (as  the  name  of  God 
is  transferred  also  to  other  beings,  Ps. 
Ixii.,)*  who  is  in  avowed  enmity  with 
matter,  and  endeavours  to  bring  it  into 
subjection  to  himself,  and  to  form  it,  but 
is  never  able  wholly  to  subdue  its  oppo- 
sition.! The  ungodly  Being  of  matter, 
■which  resists  all  fashioning  and  forming, 
is  the  source  of  all  evil;  and  this  ungodly 
Being,  concentrated  in  that  power  of  blind 
impulse  which  is  associated  with  matter, 
is  Satan.  The  distinction  he  draws  be- 
tween true  moral  perfection,  which  con- 
sists in  holiness  and  love,  whose  essence 
it  is  only  to  impart  itself,  only  to  bless,  to 
make  happy,  to  redeem — and  bare  right- 
eousness, justice,  or  uprightness,  which 
weighs  every  one  according  to  merit — 
rewards  and  punishes,  recompenses  good 
with  good,  and  evil  with  evil,  and  which 
brings  forth  only  outward  propriety  of 
conduct, — this  was  the  fundamental  prac- 
tical notion,  on  which  all  Marcion's  other 
notions  rested.  Whilst  some;};  formed  to 
themselves  assuredly  too  gross  anthropo- 
patliical  representations  of  tlie  retributive 
justice  of  God,  which  could  not  well  be 
reconciled  with  the  idea  of  a  God,  who  is 
Love.  JMarcion,  in  combating  these  re- 
presentations, (as  he  was  generally,  from 
his  impetuous  and  rugged  nature,  inclined, 
in  controversy,  to  carry  matters  to  the 
utmost  extremity,)  made  out  an  absolute 
contradiction  between  justice  and  holi- 
ness, so  that  it  was  impossible,  in  his 
opinion,  that  both  attributes  should  exist 
side  by  side  in  the  same  being.     It  must 


•  01cm,  Strom,  lib.  iii.  p.  425.     Tertull,  c.  M. 
lib.  i.e.  7—15. 

f  Ephr.  Svr.  Oral.  14,  p.  463,  D. 
i  See  Part  I. 


295 


be  confessed,  that  while  he  opposed  jtis- 
fice  to  holiness^  and  under  the  former 
name  collected  together  all  the  marks 
which  he  believed  that  he  could  find  in 
the  Old  Testament  (when  interpreted  and 
considered  in  his  own  prejudiced  views,) 
as  characteristic  of  the  Demiurgos,  he 
made  to  himself  a  conception  of  justice, 
which  was  by  no  means  consistent  or 
tenable ;  intimate  consistency,  with  him, 
always  depended  more  on  the  heart  than 
on  abstract  conceptions. 

As  far  as  our  present  means  of  informa- 
tion extend,  the  mode  in  which  Marcion 
considered  the  relation  of  the  Demiurgos 
to  the  perfect  God,  in  reference  to  the  ori- 
gin of  the  latter,  appears  very  indefinite. 
As  we  find  elsewhere,  among  the  Gnos- 
tics, nothing  but  Dualistic  systems,  and 
none  in  which  three  principles,  wholly 
independent  on  each  other  as  to  their 
origin.,  were  acknowledged,  it  seems  most 
natural  to  look  on  the  matter  in  the  fol- 
lowing light,  viz  :  that  Marcion  also  de- 
duced the  origin  of  the  imperfect  Demi- 
urgos, according  to  a  certain  line  of  de- 
velopment, from  the  perfect  God — and 
certainly  it  is  the  notion  which  comes 
most  readily  into  the  human  mind,  to 
deduce  that  which  is  imperfect  from  that 
which  is  perfect.  There  is  nothing  to 
contradict  this  supposition ;  for,  even  if 
we  grant  that  no  passage  is  found  in  an- 
cient authors,  from  which  it  can  strictly  be 
proved  that  Marcion  derived  the  origin  of 
the  Demiurgos  from  the  Supreme  God,* 
yet,  at  any  rate,  there  is  no  passage,  in 
any  writer  worthy  of  credit,  on  such  a 
point,  from  which  the  contrary  can  be 
proved.  We  can  only  say,  that  the  in- 
definiteness  in  the  accounts  of  ancient 
writers  arises  from  the  circumstance  that 
Marcion,  interested  only  in  the  practical 
view  of  tliese  subjects,  has  not  declared 
himself  with  sufficient  definiteness,  in  a 
speculative  point  of  view,  on  the  relation 
of  the  Demiurgos  to  the  Supreme  God. 

The  point,  then,  which  Marcion  deemed 
of  practical  importance,  was  to  maintain 
the  doctrine  of  a  wholly  new  creation, 
by  means  of  Christianity,  and  to  cut  in 
sunder  that  thread,  by  wliich  Christianity 
might  be  connected  with  the  world,  as  it 
was  in  its  earlier  condition.  The  Demi- 
urgos, therefore,  of  Marcion,  did  not  act 
in  obedience  to  more  lofty  ideas,  to  whifli 
he   was    subservient,  .as   an   instrument, 


*  And  yet  one  of  the  Fathers,  RhoJon  aji. 
Euseb.  V.  13,  says  that  Marcion  acknowledged 
only  Suo  dpx*^' 


296 

although  unconsciously,  or  even  against 
his  own  will,  bat  he  was  an  entirely  in- 
dependent, self-existent,  Creator  of  an 
imperfect  world,  which  corresponded  to 
his  own  limited  nature.  On  this  account 
Marcion  did  not  assume,  with  the  other 
Gnostics,  that  to  man,  as  the  image  of  the 
Demiurgos,  a  still  higher  principle  of  life 
was  imparted  by  the  Supreme  God ;  but 
he  recognised  in  the  whole  nature  of  man, 
as  a  work  of  the  Demiurgos,  only  such 
elements  as  could  proceed  from  such  a 
Creator.  The  Demiurgos  created  man, 
as  the  highest  work  of  his  creation,  after 
his  own  image,  to  represent  and  to  reveal 
it.  The  body  of  man  he  formed  out  of 
matter,  whence  its  evil  desires ;  to  this 
body  he  imparted,  out  of  his  being,  a  soul 
akin  to  himself.  He  gave  him  a  law,  in 
order  to  prove  his  obedience,  and  to  re- 
Avard  or  to  punish  him  according  to  his 
desert.  But  the  limited  Demiurgos  could 
never  have  imparted  to  man  a  Divine 
principle  of  life,  capable  of  triumphing 
over  evil.  Man  yielded  to  the  temptations 
of  sensual  pleasure,  and  thereby  was  sub- 
jected, with  his  whole  race,  to  the  do- 
minion of  matter,  and  the  evil  spirits, 
Avhich  were  its  offspring.  Out  of  the 
whole  race  of  degraded  man,  the  Demi- 
urgos chose  only  one  people  for  his  own 
especial  guidance.  He  revealed  himself 
peculiarly  to  this  people,  the  Jews,  and 
gave  them  a  religious  code,  consisting — 
as  it  corresponded  to  his  own  nature  and 
character — on  the  one  hand  of  a  ceremo- 
nial religion,  which  busied  itself  only  in 
externals,  and  on  the  other  of  a  positive 
(literally,  commanding,)  imperfect  mo- 
rality, without  an  inward  Divine  life, 
without  any  power  to  produce  a  true  in- 
ward sanctification,  without  the  spirit  of 
love.  He  rewarded  those  who  faithfully 
observed  this  law,  with  a  happy  condi- 
tion after  death,  adapted  to  their  limited 
nature,  in  company  with  their  pious  fore- 
fathers.* 

The  Demiurgos  was  not  powerful  enough 
to  make  his  people  the  ruling  nation,  and 
to  extend  his  dominion  over  the  whole 
earth :  but  he  promised  to  those  who 
were  devoted  to  him,  a  Redeemer,  a  Mes- 
siah, through  whom  he  would  at  last  ob- 
tain this  object  in  a  contention  with  the 
hostile  powers  of  the  t-Xjj,  and  through 
\fhom  he  would  gather  together  the  scat- 
tered Jews,  exercise   a  severe  judgment 


CHRISTOLOGY REDEMPTION. 


*  Apud  inferos  in  sinu  Abrahami.  Tertull.  c. 
M.  lib.  iii.  c.  24.  Clom.  Strom,  lib.  v.  f.  546. 
[Sylb.  233.    Potter,  645.    Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  4.] 


over  the  heathen  and  sinners,  and  lead 
his  people  to  an  undisturbed  enjoyment 
of  all  earthly  happiness,  in  a  kingdom  that 
should  rule  over  the  whole  earth.  But 
the  perfect  God,  whose  nature  is  compas- 
sion and  love,  could  not  allow  this  severe 
sentence,  upon  men  who  were  overcome 
by  their  own  weakness,  to  take  effect.  It 
is  consistent  with  his  character  not  to  look 
to  merit,  like  the  Demiurgos,  but  out  of 
free  love  to  take  care  of  those  who  are 
altogether  alien  to  him,  of  the  lost ;  and 
not  to  begin  with  proposing  a  law,  on  the 
observance  or  nonobservance  of  which 
the  fate  of  man  should  depend,  but  to  re- 
veal and  impart  himself,  as  the  source  of 
all  holiness  and  blessedness,  to  those  who 
are  but  willing  to  receive  him.  The  ap- 
pearance of  Christ  was  the  self-revelation* 
of  the  Supreme  God  hitherto  wholly  hid- 
den from  this  lower  creation.  Perhaps, 
before  Marcion  became  a  Gnostic,  he  had, 
in  his  own  country,  embraced  that  form 
of  the  so-called  Patripassianism'\  which 
was  current  in  Asia  Minor,  which  main- 
tained that  the  same  Divine  subject  was 
betokened  by  different  names  only  as 
spoken  of  under  different  relations ;  as 
the  Father,  when  spoken  of  as  hidden, — 
as  the  Son,  or  the  Logos,  when  self-re- 
vealing; and  that  it  was  only  this  self- 
revealing  God  who  had  united  himself 
with  a  human  body.  At  all  events  this 
view  was  the  most  suited  to  the  system 
and  the  mind  of  Marcion.  It  was  a  wel- 
come thing  to  him,  to  remove  the  distinc- 
tion which  the  Church  doctrine  acknow- 
ledged between  Christ  and  the  Supreme 
Being ;  he  was  thoroughly  imbued  with 
the  conviction,  that  Christ  and  Chris- 
tianity are  nothing  but  a  communication 
of  the  Supreme  God  himself  to  man  in  his 
limited  condition.  (It  is  well  to  remark, 
generally,  that  among  the  Palripassians 
the  practical  view  of  Christianity  was  es- 
pecially the  predominant  one.)  As  now 
Marcion,  in  tlie  character  of  a  Patripas- 
sian,  would  admit  of  no  perfect  human 
personality  in  Christ,  it  was  the  more  easy 
for  Docetism  to  insinuate  itself  into  his 
views.  This  Docetism  was  not  only 
founded  in  his  view  of  matter,  but  it  was 
thoroughly  suited  to  the  whole  nature  and 
spirit  of  his  dogmatic  views  in  every  re- 
spect. Christianity,  according  to  him, 
was   to   appear  as  a  fragmentary,  thing. 


*  Tertullian,  c.  M.  lib.  i.  c.  11. 

f  Of  which  we  shall  speak,  more  at  large  in  our 
section  relative  to  the  formation  of  the  Church 
doctrines. 


DOCETISM. — THE    PASSION. 


entirely  witliout  preparations  for  it,  and 
not  to  be  attached  to  any  thing  else ;  as 
Tertuilian  excellently  said,  with  Marcion 
every  thing  is  to  be  suddcii.  His  gospel, 
therefore,  began  with  the  journey  of 
Christ  to  Capernaum  in  the  fifteenth  year 
of  tlie  reign  of  1'iberius ;  and  his  sudden 
appearance  as  a  teacher.* 

According  also  to  the  theory  of  Mar- 
cion, Jesus  was  not  the  Messiah  promised 
by  the  Demiurgos  through  the  prophets, 
as  many  of  the  tokens  of  the  Messiah 
contained  in  them  are  wanting  in  him  5 
and,  on  the  contrary,  tliat  which  is  pecu- 
liar in  his  character,  and  in  his  operations, 
is  by  no  means  to  be  found  among  tlie 
Messianic  traits  delivered  to  us  in  the 
prophets.  Marcion  endeavoured  to  go 
through  with  the  contrast  between  Christ, 
as  tlie  history  of  the  Gospel  represents 
him,  and  the  Christ  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment :  even  in  this  we  see  how  deeply  the 
image  of  Christ  had  stamped  itself  upon 
his  warm  heart;  but  even  that  very  cir- 
cumstance rendered  him  unjust,  by  lead- 
ing him  to  expect  that  the  foretype, 
which  was  given  to  the  prophetic  view 
under  a  veil,  which  was  to  be  for  a  time, 
should  fully  equal  the  reality  that  ap- 
peared. It  was  then  to  be  considered 
only  as  an  accommodation^  when  Jesus 
called  himself  the  Messiah,  in  order  to 
find  a  point  by  which  the  Jews  might 
unite  themselves  to  him ;  to  win  their 
confidence  through  a  form  which  was 
familiar  to  them,  and  then  to  insinuate 
the  higher  things  into  this  form.f  It  was 
natural  enough  that  Christ,  who  pre- 
supposed only  a  sense  of  the  needful- 
ness of  that  which  had  hitherto  been 
wanting  to  man,  a  feeling  of  the  need 
in  Avhich  man  stands  of  help  and  re- 
demption, and  recjuired  only  an  accept- 
ance, in  childlike  faith,  of  the  divine 
source  of  life  wliich  he  communicated  to 
man;  it  was  natural,  according  to  these 
views,  that  he  should  find  no  acceptance 
with  the  self-righteous  servants  of  the 
Demiurgos,  self-contented  in  their  own 
limited  nature,  and  should  find  a  more 
ready  entrance  into  the  hearts  of  the  hea- 
then, who  had  abandoned  themselves  to 
the  feeling  of  their  misery.  The  Demi- 
urgos would  of  course  necessarily  attack 
him,  as  one  that  wished  to  destroy  his 
kingdom,  under  the  pretence  of  being  the 
Messiah  promised  by  him.     He  wished  to 


•  Tcrtull.  iv.  17. 

•f-  Ut  per  solonnc  apud  eos  et  familiare  nomen 
irrcperet  in  Judaeorum  fidem,  c.  iii.  15. 

38 


297 


bring  about  his  death  through  the  Jews, 
who  were  devoted  to  him,  [i.  e.  the  Devil- 
tirgos^  Tr.]  but  he  could  etl'ect  nothing 
against  the  surpassing  power  of  the  Su- 
preme God.  The  passion  of  Christ  would 
serve  only  for  the  fulfilment  of  his  [i.  e. 
Marcioii'^s,  Tr.j  benevolent  designs,  in 
respect  to  human  nature:  the  heart  of 
Marcion  must  have  been  interested  in  a 
love,  that  suflered,  and  obtained  the  vic- 
tory through  suflering;  in  him,  whom 
alone  he  acknowledged  as  our  apostle,  he 
found  a  great  deal  about  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  for  human  nature, — and  yet  this 
did  not  well  consist  with  his  Docetism. 
Marcion  appropriated  to  himself  the  doc- 
trine which  already  existed  in  the  tradition 
of  the  Church  about  the  descent  of  Christ 
into  the  world  below  ;*  but  one  is  inclined 
to  inquire  whether  he  can  have  taken  a 
doctrine  on  the  mere  authority  of  the  tra- 
dition of  the  Church  ;  and  it  will  surely 
prove  to  be  the  case,  that  he  has  been 
willing  to  overlook  that  which  would  not 
otherwise  be  satisfactory  to  him  in  this 
authority,  for  the  sake  of  its  value  in  a 
dogmatical  point  of  view,  because  its  doc- 
trine suited  so  \yell  with  his  whole  sys- 
tem. This  doctrine  is,  indeed,  distinctly 
proclaimed  in  the  first  epistle  of  St.  Peter; 
but  with  the  ultra-Pauline  Marcion,  St. 
Peter  was  no  genuine  apostle.  Still,  he 
might  think,  perhaps,  that  he  found  this 
doctrine  in  an  epistle  of  St.  Paul  himself, 
namely,  in  Ephes.  iv.  9.  Other  Gnostics 
gave  it  a  diflijrent  application,  because 
with  them  this  earth  itself  was  tlie  lower 
world  [unterwelt,  under-world]  into  which 
Christ  descended,  in  order  to  set  free  the 
captives.  Marcion  understood  the  ex- 
pression, lower  world,  in  the  sense  given 
to  it  by  the  Church  doctrine,  namely,  the 
general  abode  of  departed  spirits.  Only 
he  did  not  receive  the  common  opinion, 
that  Christ  descended,  in  order  to  place 
the  saints  of  the  Old  Testament  in  con- 
nection with  himself.  These  were,  like 
the  Jews  on  earth,  incapal)le  of  enjoying 
the  blessings  of  a  redeeming,  eternal  love, 
in  consequence  of  their  self-righteous- 
ness, and  tlie  enjoyment  of  a  happiness 
which  satisiied  their  limited  nature.  But 
Marcion,  the  friend  of  tlie  heathen,  could 
never  have  adopted  the  notion,  that  so 
many  heathens  who  had  died  previously 
should  be  given  up  to  the  power  of  the 
Demiurgos,  and  be  excluded  from  the 
benefits  of  redemption;  Christ,  therefore, 
descended  below,  in  order  to  preach  the 

•  The  Descensus  Christi  ad  inferos. 


298 


Gospel  to  the  heathen,  who  were  dead, 
and  to  bless  them.* 

It  would  seem,  although  it  cannot  be 
decided  upon  with  absolute  certainty,  that 
Marcion  taught  that  the  Messianic  pro- 
phecies of  the  Old  Testament  would  still 
be  fulfilled  with  reference  to  the  believers 
in  the  Demiurgos.  The  Messiah  pro- 
mised by  the  Demiurgos  was  to  appear, 
and  would  execute  a  severe  penal  sen- 
tence against  those  who  were  not  freed 
from  his  power  by  faith  in  the  higher 
Christ,  would  raise  up  the  dead  saints  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  unite  all  in  a 
millennial  reign  of  earthly  happiness. 
The  eternal  heavenly  kingdom^  to  which 
Christians  belonged,  would  then  form  the 
proper  contrast  to  the  transitory  earthly 
kingdom.  The  souls  of  the  Christians 
would  lay  aside  their  gross  bodies,  as  the 
chicken  raises  itself  out  of  the  egg,  as  the 
kernel  throws  away  the  shell,  or  leaves 
the  outer  covering  in  the  earth,  and  raises 
itself  up  free  into  the  light  of  day  ;  as  the 
ripe  fruit  falls  away  from  the  stalk.f 

A  doctrinal  system  like  that  of  Mar- 
cion, in  which  the  contrast  between  the 
Law  and  the  Gospel  was  thus  declared, 
could  be  followed  only  by  a  holy,  moral 
system;  for  he  made  out  the  difference 
between  the  two  to  consist  in  this,  that 
the  first  (the  law,)  could  communicate  to 
man  no  true  inward  sanctification,  no 
power  for  victory  over  evil ;  but  the 
second  (the  Gospel,)  brought  man,  through 
faith,  into  connection  with  a  divine  source 
of  life;  which  connection  would  neces- 
sarily reveal  itself  through  the  conquest 
of  evil,  and  through  the  sanctification  of 
the  life.  Even  the  most  zealous  oppo- 
nents of  Marcion,  who  were  glad  to  rake 
together  all  the  evil  they  could  possibly 
accuse  him  of,  and  who  did  not  recognise 
the  essential  difference  between  tlie  sys- 
tem of  Marcion  and  all  other  Gnostic 
systems,  could  not  deny  that  the  Mar- 
cionites  were  entirely  distinguished  by 
their  conduct  from  those  Gnostic  antino- 
mians,  who  preached  up  a  life  of  lawless- 
ness after  man's  own  fancies  •,  tliey  could 
not  deny,  for  instance,  that  they  (the 
Marcionites,)  were  on  a  par  with  the 
strictest  Christians  in  their  abhorrence 
of  the  heathen  theatres  and  public  plea- 
sures.;}; While  many  Gnostics,  through 
their  doctrine,  that  an  accommodation  to 


MARCION  S    MORAL    DOCTRINES. 


•  See  IreniBUs.  i.  c.  27,  §  2,  c.  i.  24. 
\  Tertullian,  iii.  3,  4,  &  24 ;  iv.  29 ;  iii.  29. 
Eph.  Svr.  Orat.  .52,  6,  p.  5.'Jl-2. 
\  TertuU.  c.  M.  i.  28 


the  predominant  errors  of  the  times  ia 
allowable,  or  through  the  principle  that 
outward  things  are  a  matter  of  no  con- 
sequence, made  it  a  very  easy  thing  to 
escape  the  duty  of  martyrdom  ;  the  Mar- 
cionites, on  the  contrary,  certainly  be- 
lieved themselves  bound  to  give  their  wit- 
ness to  Christianity,*  which  was  deeply 
engrafted  in  their  hearts.  But  how  all 
that  belongs  to  our  nature  is  sanctified 
and  ennobled  by  Christianity,  was  a  truth 
which  Marcion  could  not  acknowledge, 
because  he  did  not  recognise  the  God  in 
Christ  as  the  God  of  Nature.  In  this 
point  of  view,  the  teachers  of  the  Church 
might  justly  make  this  reproach  against 
him,  that  his  Dualism,  in  union  with 
Christianity,  which  always  pursues  the 
view  of  an  ennoblement  of  nature  through 
a  divine  principle  of  life,  is  practically 
illogical ;  as,  for  example,  in  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Sacraments.  The  ascetic 
turn  which  Marcion  had,  even  when  he 
was  a  member  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  in  which,  as  we  have  before  observed, 
his  system  had  found  a  natural  point  to 
engraft  itself  upon,  was  now  again  still 
more  furthered  and  strengthened  by  his 
more  fully  formed  views  of  nature,  and 
of  the  creation  of  the  Demiurgos.  He 
reckoned  a  mode  of  life,  such  as  was  led 
in  the  Catholic  Church  only  by  certain 
classes  of  ascetics,  to  be  an  essential  part 
of  Christianity :  Christians  were,  even 
here  below,  to  lead  a  heavenly  life,  en- 
tirely freed  from  all  defilement  through 
matter;  he  who  was  incapable  of  leading 
such  a  life,  must  remain  in  the  class  of 
Catechumens,  and  could  not  yet  be  ad- 
mitted to  Baptism-t 

Whether  Marcion  recognised  only  St. 
Paul  as  a  genuine  apostle.,  and  cnndemned, 
after  the  fashioiiof  ultra-Paulitcs,  all  the 
rest  of  the  apostles,  as  Judaizing  adul- 
terators of  Christianity ;  or  whether  he 
only  declared  the  writings  that  were  pub- 
lished under  their  names  to  he  spurious 
documents,  counterfeited  hy  Judaizing 
Christians,  cannot  be  decided  with  cer- 
tainty from  the  unsatisfiictory  natin-e  of 
the  existing  accounts ;  but  the  first  is  the 
most  probable.  This  supposition  suits 
best  with  the  character  of  the  abrupt  and 


*  See,  for  example,  Euscb-iv.  15;  vii.  12.  De 
Martyr.  Paltestinre,  c.  10. 

f  Tertull.  c.  M.  lib.  iv.  c.  34.  Quomodo  nup- 
tias  dirimis  ?  nee  conjungens  marem  et  foniinam, 
ncc  alibi  conjunctos  ad  sacramentum  baptisinatis 
et  eucharistia)  ad  mittens,  nisi  inter  se  conjuraveriat 
ad  versus  fructum  nuptiarum,. 


MARCIONITE    SECTS — CHARACTER    OF    APELLES.  299 


violent  Marcion,  who  was  more  ready  to 
make  points  of  contrast  than  to  hiok  for 
means  of  accommodation.  It  is  certain 
that  he  acknowledged  as  the  genuine 
sources  of  Christian  knowledge  nothing 


piignant  to  the  whole  character  of  the 
Alarcionitish  system ;  for,  according  to 
the  ideas  of  Marcion,  until  the  appear- 
ance of  Christ,  nollimg  whatever  that 
was  akin  to  the  Supreme  God  could  have 


I  the  Demiurgos  and  of  the  Psychici ;  on 
the  contrary,  Lucanus  the  3Iarcionite  de- 


hut  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  an  original  ]  been  in  existence  in  tliis  world.  While 
Gospel,  which,  by  mistaking  a  passage,  [Marcion  would  not  make  any  further  con- 
he  supposed  to  have  been  cited  by  St.  j  elusions  relative  to  tlie  ultimate  fate  of 
Paul.     But  as  he  set  out  from  the  settled     -     -       ■  .     ,    .      ^       ,  .  . 

opinion,  that  these  documents  were  no  [ ' 
longer  found  in  their  original  condition,  I  termined  that  all  w-hicli  is  Psychical,  is 
but  had  been  adulterated  by  the  Judaizers,  perishable,  and  that  nothing  but  the  imv- 
whose  form  seems  to  have  haunted  him  j  f^anxov,  which  has  become  participative 
like  a  spectre,  he  allowed  himself  to  use  j  of  the  divine  nature,  is  immortal.* 
criticism  ad  lihitum^  in  order  to  restore  Apelles  had  for  a  season  withdrawn 
them  to  their  original  form.  His  pre-  1  himself  from  the  predominant  practical 
tended  original  Gospel,  used  (as  he  fan-  turn  of  Marcion,  and  had  indulged  in 
cied,)  by  St.  Paul,  had  arisen  from  a  mu-  many  speculations,  entirely  foreign  to  the 
tilation  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke.*  Cer-  j  original  Marcionite  system ;  but  at  length 
tainly  his  criticism  was  by  no  means  the  original  practical  disposition  broke 
logical-,  for  much  remained,  which  no- !  forth  again,  and  became  prominent  in  him 
thing  but  a  forced  system  of  exegesis,  j  in  a  remarkable  manner.  TertuUianf  gives 
through  ignorance  of  right  hermeneutic  an  unfavorable  account  of  the  morals  of 
principles,  could  possibly  bring  into  har-  this  man;  but  a  teacher  of  the  Catholic 
'- -'    '  ■  Church,  at  the  beginning  of    the    third 

century,   named   Rhodon,   whose     testi- 
mony is  unsuspicious  as  being  that  of  an 


mony  with  the  system  of  Marcion. 

Marcionite  Sects. 

While  among  other  Gnostics  the  caprice 
and  the  multifariousness  of  their  specula- 


enemy,  defends  him  against  this  reproach, 

^  _^^^  ^ _^  ^ for  he  represents  him  as  a  man  generally 

tions  and"  fi7ti^nrcaused""thriaterdisd-  respected  on  account  of  his  conduct.^ 
pies,  in  many  respects,  to  depart  from  the  I  Probably  there  was  no  other  origm  to 
doctrines  of  their  Master;  on  the  con-  these  accusations,  than  tjie  entirely^ mno^ 
trary,  ia  the  system  of  Marcion,  the  pre 


cent  intercourse  of  Apelles  with  a  female 


dominance  of  a  practical  turn,  and  the  phdosopher,  named  Philumcne,  as  people 
meagreness  of  the  speculative  part  in  were  always  ready  to  lay  every  thmg  that 
comparison  of  the  other  Gnostic  systems, '  is  evil  to  the  charge  of  a  person  who  has 
were  the  cause  of  the  changes  which  his  once  been  branded  as  a  heretic.  Ph.lu- 
disciples,  among  whom  a  practical  dispo-  ]  mene  can  only  be  reproached  with  havmg 
sition  was  not  so  predominant  as  with  forgotten  her  calling  as  a  woman,  and 
him,  made  in  his  doctrines.  Many  ap-  having,  in  consequence,  fallen  into  a  sort 
propriated  to  themselves  the  elements  of  "f  ^^reamy  enthusiasm,  and  Apelles,  with 
other  Gnostic  systems,  which  did  not  suit  |  having  encouraged  her  in  this,  an(  look- 
that  of  Marcion,  in  order  to  fill  up  tlie  •"?  o"  her  fantastic  essays,  which  pro- 
gaps  which  they  believed  they  found  in  j  needed  from  an  unhealtiiy  condition,  as 
in  it.  ?^Iany,like  the  Marcionite  Marcus,!  I  rev<ilations,  which  he  took  the  trouble  to 
received  the  doctrines  of  the  Syrian  i  >nterpret.§  But  the  notice  which  1  ertul- 
Gnosis,  relative  to  the  creation  of  nian  ;J  \  han  gives  us  is  of  considerable  use,  viz  : 
namely,  that  the  Supreme  God  had  com- j  that  his  long  sojourn  at  Alexandria  su- 
municated  to  man  something  of  his  own  perinduced  a  change  in  his  originally 
Divine  Life  (the  ^►at.^a,)  but  that  m^n  .^t'^rcionilish  views;  for  all  which  we 
hadlostitbysin,— a  view  which  wasre-;ean  deduce  from  the  scattered  accounts 
: ^in  TertuUian,  Origen,  Epiplianius,  and  in 

•  An  elaborate  discussion  of  Marcion's  Canon  \  the  treatise  of  Ambrose  de  Paradiso,  in- 
of  the  New  Testament  would  be  out  of  place  here,  dicates  the  remodeling  of  his  system 
but  on  this  subject  see  more  in  the  learned  and  throuirh  the  inlluence  of  the  Alexandrian 
acute  investigations  of  my  friends  Hahn  and 
Olshausen,  and  in  my  Genetic  Development  of 
the  Gnostic  systems. 

-(■  In  the  Dialog,  de  Recta  Fide.     See  the  0pp. 
Origen.  T.  i. 

t  See  p.  280.  the  account  of  the  Ophites,  and 
Saturninus,  p.  284. 


*  See  Tcrtullian  de  Resurrect.  Cam.  c.  2. 
Orig.  c.  Cels.  lib.  iii.  c.  27. 

I  Prescript.  Hffiret.  c.  30 

\  Euseb.  V.  13. 

§  His  book  of  <f  avfaara;,  which  is  no  longer 
extant. 


300 


APELLES    AND    PHODON GNOSTIC    WORSHIP. 


Gnosis.  And  hence  it  arises,  that  he  set 
the  visible  and  the  invisible  order  of  the 
world,  the  Deniiurgos  and  the  Supreme 
God,  and  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, in  more  connection  with  each 
other  than  the  system  of  Marcion  per- 
mitted. While  he  set  out  from  the  prin- 
ciple, that  the  Old  Testament  comes  from 
different  origins, — partly  from  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Soter,  partly  from  tliat  of  the 
Demiurgos,  and  partly  from  that  of  the 
evil  sj)irit,  who  has  every  where  trou- 
bled and  defiled  the  Revelations  of  the 
Divine,* — he  was  desirous  of  culling  out 
in  all  cases  that  which  is  good.  J  use  all 
the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  he 
says,  while  J  gather  together  that  wliich 
is  useful.|  lie  appealed  to  that  declara- 
tion, so  often  quoted  by  the  ancients,  and 
which  is,  perhaps,  attributed  to  our  Sa- 
viour,   in    the    EvayyiXl'^v    y.a.^^   "EjS^atoy?, 

"  Be  ye  trusty  money-changers,  who  are 
able,  universally,  to  distinguish  between 
the  genuine  and  tlie  counterfeit  gold,  the 
true  and  the  false."  (Taea-St  (Joxif^ot  r^xvi- 
^trat.)  In  age,  Apelles,  finding  no  satis- 
lactory  conclusion  in  his  speculations 
upon  the  incomprehensible,  took  refuge 
in  the  faith  which  obeys  an  inward  ne- 
cessity without  being  able  to  solve  every 
difficulty  to  itself,  (difficulties  which,  in 
his  case,  met  him  even  in  that  which  he 
could  not  choose  but  to  recognise ;)  he 
could  do  no  other,  he  said;  he  felt  him- 
self obliged  to  believe  in  one  eternal  God, 
as  the  original  cause  of  all  existence,  but 
he  could  not  scientifically  })rove  how  all 
existence  was  necessarily  to  be  traced 
back  to  the  one  original  principle.  The 
Church-teacher,  Rhodon,  to  whom  he 
made  these  communications  in  confi- 
dence, laughed  at  him  as  one  who  pre- 
tended to  be  a  teacher,  but  only  believed 
what  he  taught,  and  acknowledged  that  he 
could  not  prove  it;  but  one  is  inclined  to 
ask,  whether  the  laugher  in  this  case 
was  wiser  than  the  man  whom  he  laughed 
at,  and  whether  Rhodon  himself,  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  word,  could  prove 
that  which  Apelles  avowed  that  he  only 
believed.  Apelles  appeared  to  have  no 
more  taste  for  controversy  on  these 
.sul)jects.  "•Every  one,"  he  said,  "may 
keep  to  his  own  faith;  for  every  one 
who  places  his  confidence  on  him  that 
was  crucified,  will  come  to  the  bliss  of 

*  In  a  work  whicli  he  called  Conclusions, 
(^'S.VKMyiTfAci,)  he  endeavoured  to  indicate  the 
contradictions  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament. 

f  Xgai  uTTo  7ra.7iM:  ypu<pK,  uvxf^iycev  rx  ^>ii7iju:t. 
Epiphan.  Hteres.  44.   §  3. 


heaven,  provided  only  he  shows  his  faith 
by  good  works." 

ADDITIONAL    REMARKS. 

On  the  Cidtus  of  the  Gnostics. 

We  have  hitherto  considered  the  Gnos- 
tic sects  only  in  reference  to  their  faith 
and  moral  systems ;  it  will  be  instructive, 
however,  just  cursorily  to  compare  their 
diflferent  dispositions  in  regard  to  their 
modes  of  worship,  (their  CuUiis.)  Even 
here  also  we  find  the  differences,  which 
were  often  repeated  in  after  times.  Many 
Gnostics — as,  for  example,  Ptolemseus — 
in  virtue  of  their  more  inward  Christianity 
and  their  predominantly  intellectual  cha- 
racter, were  able  to  conceive  the  relation 
of  all  exterior  observances  of  religion  to 
its  real  essence,  more  justly  than  other 
Church-teachers,  who  could  not  separate 
the  outward  from  the  inward^  in  religion, 
with  such  clearness  of  conviction  and 
view.  There  were,  besides,  some,  who, 
like  the  Jewish  religious  idealists*  at  Alex- 
andria, out  of  their  theosophic  idealism  re- 
jected all  exterior  worship,  as  only  fit  for 
the  Psychici,  who  are  still  imprisoned  in 
the  bonds  of  their  senses,  and  are  unable 
to  raise  themselves  up  to  the  pure  spiritual 
view  [anschauung ;]  and  these  persons 
would  allow  nothing  to  be  availing  but  a 
religion  of  the  inward  spiritual  view 
[Geistesanschauung,]  raised  above  all  that 
is  outward  and  sensuous.  These  persons 
would  say,  that  man  cannot  represent  the 
overwhelming  and  divine  mysteries  by 
sensuous  and  transitory  things,  and  that 
real  redemption  consists  only  in  know- 
ledge.|  But  the  same  theosophic  dispo- 
sition might  also  bring  with  it  a  symbolic 
Cullus^  full  of  mystic  pomp,  as  we  see 
in  the  case  of  the  Marcosians^,  from 
whom  Irenccus  traces  those  idealists,  who 
threw  aside  all  outward  religious  observ- 
ances. In  accordance  with  the  distinc- 
tion between  a  psychical  and  pneumatical 
Christianity,  they  made  a  distinction  also 
of  a  twofold  baptism. 


*  See  Part  I.  p.  34. 

f  Iren.  1.  c.  24.  §  4.  Theodoret.  Hseret.  fab. 
i.  c.  10.  If  the  C«/a7is,  asrainst  whom  Tertullian 
writes  in  his  book  De  Bnpiismo,  were  identical  with 
the  Gnostic  Cainites,  with  whom  they  arc  some- 
times confounded,  then  we  must  place  these  latter 
in  the  same  class,  which  well  suits  their  whole 
character ;  bat  the  grounds  on  which  those  Caians 
determined  against  the  necessity  of  the  external 
rite  of  baptism,  do  not  look  like  the  wild  dreamy 
s[)iritof  the  Cainites;  and  besides,  there  is  nothinof 
peculiarly  Gnostic  in  them,  [namely,  the  Caians.] 

^  Followers  of  Mark. 


BAPTISMAL    RITES. EXTREME    UNCTIOX. 


1.  The  baptism  into  Jesus,  the  Mes- 
Fiah  of  the  Psychici,  through  wliich  the 
believing  Psychici  obtained  remission  of 
their  sins,  and  the  liope  of  an  eternal  life 
in  the  kingdom  of  the  Demiurgos. 

2.  The  pneumatical  baptism,  a  baptism 
into  the  heavenly  Christ  who  was  united 
with  Jesus,  through  whom  spiritual  na- 
tures attixin  to  a  self-consciousness,  and  to 
perfection,  and  enter  into  communion  with 
the  Pleroma.  Their  ceremonies,  and  the 
formula?  they  used  in  baptism,  were  pro- 
bably diflerent,  according  as  a  person  ob- 
tained i\\e  first  or  the  second  baptism,  and 
was  received  into  the  class  of  Psychici 
or  PncumaticL  The  latter  was  apparently 
accompanied  with  more  pomp  than  the 
other.  According  to  the  Gnostic  idea, 
(see  above,)  viz.,  that  the  baptized  and 
redeemed  pneumatical  nature  entered  into 
a  spiritual  marriage  (a  syzygy)  with  its 
other  half  in  the  world  of  spirits,  the 
angel  which  makes  one  whole  with  it ; — 
according  to  this  idea  they  celebrated 
baptism  as  a  marriage  feast,  and  adorned 
the  chamber  where  it  was  to  take  place 
as  a  marriage  chamber.  One  of  the  for- 
mula} used  in  the  baptism  of  a  Pneuma- 
ticus,  was  this  :  [You  are  baptized]  "  Into 
the  name  which  is  hidden  from  all  the 
Divinities  and  Powers  (of  the  Demi- 
urgos,) the  name  of  Truth,*  which  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  hath  drawn  up  into  the  Light- 
Zones  of  Christ,  the  living  Christ  through 
the  Holy  Spirit,  for  the  angelic  redemp- 
tion,!— that  name  through  which  all  at- 
tains its  perfection."  The  baptized  per- 
son then  said,  "  I  am  confirmed  and 
redeemed  ^^  I  am  redeemed  in  my  soul 
from  tliis  world,  and  from  all  which  pro- 
ceeds from  it,  through  the  name  of  Je- 
hovali,  who  has  redeemed  the  soul  of 
Jesus,§  tlirough  the  living  Christ."  Then 
the  assembled  throng  spoke  thus:  "Peace 
(or  health)  to  all,  over  whom  this  name 
rests."  Then  also  they  imparted  to  the 
baptized  the  consecration  to  the  Christian 
priestliood,  which  was  used  also  in  the 
Church,  by  means  of  anointing;  but  in 
this  case  it  was  performed  with  costly 


*  The  lo^dita.,  the  self-revelation  of  the  Bythos. 

■j-  E(,-  KuT^axriv  uyyiKiniiv.  For  the  redemption 
of  that,  of  which  this  spiritual  nature,  as  well  as 
the  angel  which  belonged  to  it,  must  become  a 
partaker,  in  order  that  both  together  might  become 
capable  of  entering  into  the  Pleroma,  which  was 
only  possible  to  them  in  their  mutual  union,  and 
not  in  their  state  of  separation. 

:t:  'Ej-TK^iy/uui  nxt  Kv.uTfa>fj^3.t.  See  above,  about 
florus. 

§  I  think,  that  in  that  formula  we  must  read 
Tsu  'hv'.v,  instead  of  ai/Tw. 


301 


ointment  (balsam,)  for  the  widely  extend- 
ing perfume  of  this  was  to  be  a  symbol 
of  the  overpowering  delight  of  the  Plc- 
rmna,  whicli  the  redeemed  were  destined 
to  enjoy.  Among  these  Mnrcosians  we 
lind,  at  first,  the  use  of  extreme  unction; 
they  anointed  the  dying  man  with  that 
ointment  mixed  with  water,  and  used  with 
it  formultc,  to  tlie  puqport  that  the  souls 
of  the  departed  must  be  able  to  raise 
themselves  up  free  from  the  Demiurgos 
and  all  his  powers,  to  their  mother,  the 
Sophia*  The  Ophites,  also,  had  these 
same  forms  of  adjuration  for  the  departed. 
And  that  mystical  table  of  the  same  sect, 
which  contains  a  symbolical  representa- 
tion of  their  system  (their  Siay^ccix-^a.,)  is 
well  known. 

As  Marcion  in  his  whole  character  and 
spirit  was  essentially  different  from  the 
rest  of  the  Gnostics,  so  also  did  he  differ 
from  them  in  respect  to  his  principles 
about  the  ordinances  of  worship.  By 
his  simple  and  practical  turn  of  mind, 
he  was  far  removed  from  that  mysticism 
that  delighted  in  outward  pomp;  but  then 
he  was  far  removed,  also,  from  that  proud 
contemplative  idealism.  His  endeavour 
was  here  also  to  bring  back  the  original 
Christian  simplicity  of  the  service  of  God ; 
and  he  combated  many  new  ordinances, 
as  corruptions  of  that  original  simplicity .| 
And  thus,  with  respect  to  the  practice 
which  was  then  about  in  its  commence- 
ment, of  dividing  divine  service  into  two 
parts,!;  the  one,  which  the  Catechumens 
were  to  stay  out,  and  the  other,  at  the 
commencement  of  which  they  were  to 
be  dismissed,  he  appears  to  have  con- 
tended against  it,  as  an  innovation  foreign 
to  the  spirit  of  Christianity.  He  said, 
Just  as  iit  any  other  good  thing,  let  the 
mature  Christians  sufler  those  who  are 
yet  under  instruction,  such  as  the  Cate- 


*  Iren.  I.  21.  Exorcism  in  Baptiam  also,  was 
well  suited  to  the  Gnostic  theory  of  the  indwelling 
of  manifold  Trvwy.^Ta.  C>Jitu.  [si)irits  of  a  gross  and 
sensuous  nature,  derived  from  their  connection 
with  matter. — H.  .1.  K.,]  till  the  redemption  [of 
the  individual.]  Exorcism  (wfa-g  'i^:g>ai^'./uiv(,v) 
makes  its  appearance  at  first,  even  earher  than  in 
the  North  African  Church,  (see  above,)  in  the 
Diadascal.  Anatol.  p.  800,  col.  iv.  D.  But  here  it 
may  be  quoted  as  being  a  custom  of  the  .Alexan- 
drian Church  in  general,  and  not  as  a  custom  pecu- 
liarly Gnostic. 

f  Apparently,  Tertullian  had  the  Marcionilcs 
especially  in  his  view,  when  he  says  of  the  here- 
tics, Praiscript.  c.  41,  "  Simplici/atern  volunt  esse 
prostrationem  discipline,  cujus  penes  nos  curam 
Icnocinixiin  vocant." 

t  Afterwards  called  the  Missa  Catechume- 
norum,  and  the  Missa  Fidelium 

2C 


302 


MANICHEES. ACTS  OP  ARCHELAUS. 


chumens,  to  take  part  in  prayer  also  :  they 
must  not  reserve  any  thing  Irom  ihem  on 
this  acconnt;  nor  exclude  them  on  it 
from  participation  in  the  prayers  of  the 
Church.* 

We  must,  however,  limit  the  praise 
which  has  been  bestowed  upon  Marcion, 
if  he  was  really  the  original  author  of  the 
superstitious  custc^i,  founded  on  a  mis- 
understanding of  the  passage  in  Scripture, 
1  Cor.  XV.  29,  namely  tlie  custom  of  be- 
stowing baptism  on  a  living  person,  which 
was  to  be  availing  to  a  Catechumen  who 
liad  died  without  baptism;  but  it  is  alto- 
gether without  foundation,  that  the  intro- 
duction of  such  a  mistaken  baptism  has 
been  laid  to  the  charge  of  Marcion,  to 
wliose  simple  evangelical  spirit  such 
superstition  was  entirely  unsuited.  If 
such  a  superstition  prevailed  afterwards 
among  the  Marcionites,  who  had  spread 
themselves  among  the  country  people  of 
Syria,  in  the  fifth  century,  we  can  only 
say  that  it  is  not  fair  to  charge  the  foun- 
der of  the  sect  with  that  which  is  found 
among  men,  who  are  certainly  very  unlike 
him.j 

II.  Manes  X  and  the  Manichees. 

The  power  of  the  simple  Gospel  had 
bv  degrees  triumphed  over  Gnosticism, 
although  the  remains  of  Gnostic  sects  main- 
tained themselves  in  the  East  down  to 
later  centuries.  Gnosticism  had  produced 
the  effects  it  was  calculated  to  produce ; 


*  Marcion,  according  to  .Terome,  Comment,  in 
Ep.  ad  Galat.,  appealed  to  Galat.  vi.  6,  while  with  a 
thorough  disregard  of  the  context  in  that  passage, 
he  understands  nwaivm  in  an  intransitive  sense,  and 
translates  the  verse :  "  Let  the  Catechumen  par- 
take of  all  that  is  good,  together  with  his  instruc- 
tor." Hence,  the  notion  of  the  Gnostics  was  also 
present  to  the  mind  of  TertuUian,  when  he  re- 
proached the  heretics,  I.  c.  in  this  manner:  "Im- 
primis quis  catcchumenus,  quis  fidelis  incertum 
est.  Pariter  adeunt  (ecclesiam,)  pariter  audiunt, 
pariter  orant." 

f  TertuUian,  De  Resurr.  Carnis,  c.  48,  &  Adv. 
Marcion.  lib.  v.  c.  10,  by  no  means  speaks  as  if, 
in  his  time,  such  a  ba[)tism,  which  violates  the 
passage  on  which  it  is  founded,  had  been  actually 
in  use  in  any  place;  only  he  supposes  the  possi- 
bility that  such  a  custom  may  have  existed  in  the 
time  of  the  apostle,  who  may  have  alluded  to  that; 
and  ill  the  latter  passage  he  considers  another  ex- 
planation of  1  Cor.  XV.  29,  to  be  more  probable. 
But  what  Chrysostom  remarks  upon  this  passage 
can  only  be  applied  to  many  ignorant  Marcionites 
of  his  time,  and  not,  by  any  means,  to  Marcion 
himself,  and  the  older  Gnostics. 

:|:  [Neander  constantly  uses  the  name  Mani,  but 
as  I  believe  Manes  is  the  form  usually  adopted  in 
English,  I  have  changed  it. — H.  J.  R.] 


it  had,  by  the  struggle  that  took  place, 
awakened  the  powers  of  the  soul,  and 
by  the  contrast  it  offered,  it  had  brought  the 
meaning  of  the  chief  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity into  a  clearer  consciousness  and 
acknowledgment.*  But  in  the  third  cen- 
tury a  new  and  remarkable  phenomenon, 
thoroughly  akin  to  Gnosticism,  arose  out 
of  the  intermixture  of  oriental  theosophy 
with  Christianity,  namely,  Manicheeism. 
No  essential  difference  is  to  be  found  be- 
tween this  system  and  those  of  the 
Gnostics,  especially  of  the  second  class, 
except  that  here  the  Christian  element 
was  far  more  crushed  by  the  intermixture 
of  strange  materials  than  in  most  of  the 
Gnostic  systems,  and  Christianity  was 
properly  used  only  as  a  symbolical  cover- 
ing for  ideas  foreign  to  it,  so  that  one 
might  often  throw  away  the  Christian 
terms  which  are  used,  and  find  notions, 
which,  in  their  application  here,  appear 
to  resemble  a  mixture  of  Parsic,  Brah- 
minical,  and  Buddhist  religious  doctrines, 
more  than  Christianity.  And  further,  the 
oriental  element  is  not  at  all  mixed,  as  it 
is  in  the  Gnostic  systems,  with  Jewish 
theology  and  Platonic  philosophy.  The 
comparison  of  the  Manichean  system 
with  the  Basilidian,  the  Saturninian,  and 
the  Ophitic,  and  with  the  religious  sys- 
tem of  the  Zabians,  hardly  allows  us  to 
escape  recognising  one  common  source 
for  all. 

As  far  as  relates  to  the  history  of 
Manes,  the  founder  of  this  sect,  we 
have  two  kinds  of  sources  of  information, 
which  coincide  with  each  other  only  in  b 
very  few  circumstances,  and  in  all  besides 
are  entirely  different;  these  are  the  Greek 
and  the  Oriental  sources.  The  accounts 
of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  of  Epiphanius, 
and  of  the  ecclesiastical  historians  of  the 
fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  point  our  at- 
tention to  one  commom  source.|  This 
source  is  the  Acts  of  a  disputation  .said  to 
have  been  held  with  Manes  by  Archelaus, 
bishop  of  Cascar.j  But  these  Acts  are 
preserved  to  us  in  at  least  a  very  un- 
satisfactory form,  as  they  have  descended 
to  us,  with  tlie  exception  of  some  frag- 


*  See  Section  v.  on  the  development  of  the 
Church  doctrine. 

■j-  Eusebius,  who  wrote  before  this  document 
was  promulgated,  was  unable  to  relate  any  thing 
of  the  personal  history  of  Manes. 

^  Kaskar ;  if  the  name  be  not  a  corruption.  It 
may,  perhaps,  (although  on  the  evidence  of  a  very 
uncertain  conjecture,)  be  a  corruption  for  Charran 
in  Mesopotamia  (nnO 


SCYTHIANUS BUDDHA. 


303 


merits  in  Greek,  only  in  the  Latin  trans- 
lation from  a  Greek  writing,  which  per- 
haps, itself  is  only  an  unfaithful  transla- 
tion, from  a  Syriac  original.*  These  Acts 
plainly  contain  a  narration,  which  hangs 
together  ill  enougli,  and  bears  a  tolerably 
fabulous  appearance.  Even  supposing 
there  is  some  truth  as  a  foundation  for 
these  Acts,  which  may  well  be  as  there 
is  much  in  the  mode  of  bringing  forward 
the  doctrines  which  bears  marks  of  truth, 
and  is  confirmed  by  a  comparison  with 
other  representations,  yet  still  the  Greek 
writer  appears  to  have  mixed  with  it 
much  that  is  false,  from  ignorance  of 
oriental  languages  and  customs,  by  inter- 
mingling and  confusion  of  different  nar- 
rations, and  by  exaggeration  and  a  de- 
ficiency in  critical  qualifications.!  We 
are  well  aware  how  difficult  it  was  to  a 
Greek  to  place  himself  in  the  condition 
of  a  people  totally  foreign  to  his  own  na- 
tion, and  to  conceive  it  altogether  justly. 
In  some  points,  even  from  the  scanty 
means  which  we  have  for  the  unravelling 
of  this  historical  enigma,  we  are  enabled 
to  detect  traces  of  the  mistakes  which 
have  formed  the  foundation  of  these  ac- 
counts. The  first  origin  of  the  Mani- 
chean  doctrines  is  derived  from  a  Sara- 
cenic merchant,  called  Scythianus,  who  is 
represented,  during  long  travels  in  Asia, 
Egypt,  and  Greece,  to  have  acquired  great 
riches,  and  procured  himself  an  intimate 
acquaintance  both  with  Oriental  and 
Grecian  philosophy.  This  Scythianus  is 
represented  to  have  lived  near  the  apos- 
tolic age;  but  this,  even  according  to  this 
narrative  itself,  appears  to  be  an  ana- 
chronism, for  jllanes  himself  is  not  made 
to  live  till  some  generations  after  that  age. 
Still,  in  this  Scythianus  we  recognise 
an  historical  personage  really  connected 


*  Jerome,  De  Vir.  Illustr.  72,  informs  us  that 
these  Acts  were  originally  written  in  Syriac  ;  but 
among  the  Orientals,  the  first  Father  to  whom 
these  Acts  were  known  is  Severus,  bishop  of  As- 
inonina,  in  Egypt,  who  wrote  about  the  year 
A.  D.  978.  See  Renaudot,  Hist.  Patriarch.  Alex- 
andr  p.  40.  His  relation  of  the  matter  diflers  in 
many  respects  from  the  edition  of  these  Acts 
which  has  descended  to  us,  and  it  is  far  simpler, 
which  seems  to  indicate  that  the  Acts  of  which  lie 
madt'  use,  were  not  ours,  but  another  document 
akin  to  it,  and  that,  perhaps,  which  furnished  the 
foundation  of  ours.  Heraclian,  bishop  of  Chal- 
cedon,  in  Photius  cod.  9.5,  says  that  a  person 
named  Hegcmonius  drew  up  these  Greek  Acts. 

■{■  Beausobrehas  properly  discarded  the  Western 
accounts,  which  he  was  well  persuaded  were  un- 
tenable, and  confined  himself  wholly  to  the  Ori- 
ental. There  is  nothing  striking  in  what  Mos- 
heim  has  advanced  against  bim  in  this  matter. 


with  Manes;  we  find  letters  of  I\Ianes  ad- 
dressed to  a  man  of  this  name,  who  was 
also  probably  an  oriental  Theosophist.* 
The  heir  and  disciple  of  this  Scythianus 
appears  to  have  been  one  Terebinth,  who 
was  afterwards  called  Buddas.  The  name 
Buddasf  reminds  us  of  the  old  system  of 
religion,  opposed  to  Braliminism,  which 
took  its  origin  from  Eastern  India,  which 
is  still  prevalent  in  Ceylon,  Thibet  and 
the  Birman  Empire,  and  has  extended  its 
influence  even  to  the  tribes  of  Tartary. 
Tiie  relation  of  the  miraculous  birth  of 
Buddas  reminds  us  of  the  similar  ac- 
counts given  of  the  birth  of  the  Indian 
Buddha.  The  pantheistic  portion  of 
Manicheeism  may  be  compared,  in  many 
respects,  with  the  patitJieislic  parts  of  the 
old  Buddhaism.  I\Ianes  is  represented,  in 
fact,  to  have  travelled  to  the  East  Indies 
and  China,  and  many  of  the  later  Mani- 
checs  appeal  to  the  circuinstance  that 
Manes,  Buddhas,  Zoroaster,  Christ,  and 
the  Sun  (the  higher  spirit  which  animated 
the  Sun,)  are  the  same  ;  that  is  to  say,  all 
these  founders  of  a  religion  are  only  dif- 
ferent Incarnations  of  the  Sun,;i;  and  there- 
fore, there  is,  in  these  different  systems, 
only  one  religion  under  different  forms. 

In  the  Oriental  accounts  there  is  far 
more  internal  connection  ;  but  these  are 
found  in  writers  very  much  later  than  the 
Greek  documents.  Tlie  Orientals  have, 
however,  without  doubt,  made  use  of 
earlier  documents,  and  in  their  use  of 
them  they  were  not  exposed  to  the  same 
causes  of  error,  as  those  which  led  the 
Greeks  astray.§ 


*   See  Fabricii  Biblioth.  Grnec.  vol.  vii.  .316. 

f  It  has  been  justly  remarked,  that  the  Greek 
T^f.iS/vSsf,  is  perhaps,  only  a  translation  of  the 
Chaldce  X^iOll  by  which  the  Hebrew  IlSt;^ 
is  rendered  in  the  Targum,  and  which  the  Alex 
andrian  translators  render  by  Ti^i/ii\6o:.  And 
besides.  Terebinth,  or  Buddas,  like  Scythianus, 
may  have  been  an  historical  person,  to  whom 
much  that  belongs  to  the  Indian  Buddha  may 
have  been  transferred. 

I  The  later  offsets  of  the  Manichees,  when 
they  entered  into  the  Catholic  Church,  were  ob- 
liged to  condemn  the  doctrines  before  maintained 
by  them  :  TiV  Z^ptSiv  x.:u  B'.uJsv  ku.i  toy  X^imt 
K-u  Tct  M-xvi^ii'.v  iv^  n-JJ  Tcv  ctiiTcv  I'lvui.  See 
Jacob.  ToUii  Insignia  Italic.  Trajcct.  1696. 
p.  1.34. 

§  The  Oriental  accounts  are  to  be  found  in 
Herbelot,  Bibliotheque  Oricnta!e,sub  v.  Mani ;  in 
the  History  of  the  Sassanidx-,  by  the  I'ersian  his- 
torian, Mirkhond,  ap.  Silvcstre  de  Sacy,  Me 
moires  sur  diverses  Antiquittis  de  la  Perse :  Paris, 
1793;  in  Abulpliaragc,  and  Pocock,  Specimen 
Histor.  Arab. 


304 


PARSISM   AND    CHRISTIANITY. 


In  order  properly  to  appreciate  the 
phenomenon  presented  by  the  appearance 
of  a  man  like  Manes,  we  must  compare 
together  the  circumstances  and  the  rela- 
tions under  which  he  was  formed.  Manes 
was  born  a  Persian,  but  we  are  led  to  in- 
quire whether  this  geographical  term  is 
to  be  used  in  its  strictest  limits,  or 
whether  we  are  only  to  understand  by  it 
some  one  province  of  the  great  Persian 
empire.  Tiie  latter  view  is  supported  by 
the  circumstance  that  Manes  composed 
his  ivrithigs  in  the  Syriac  language,  from 
which  we  might  be  led  to  conclude  that 
he  derived  his  origin  from  one  of  those 
provinces  of  the  Persian  empire,  where 
Syriac  was  the  language  of  the  country. 


ception  and  connection  in  each,  so  tliat 
from  the  very  first  he  had  only  formed 
a  peculiar  religious  system  for  himself  by 
an  amalgamation  of  the  Persian  and  the 
Christian.  It  is  easy  to  explain,  in  any 
case,  how  a  man  brought  up  in  tlie  Per- 
sian religion  believed  that  he  could  ob- 
serve a  striking  connection  between  the 
ideas  of  a  kingdom  of  Orniuzd  and  Ahri- 
man,  and  those  of  a  kingdom  of  Light 
and  Darkness,  of  God  and  Satan  ;  be- 
tween the  Persian  doctrine  which  allows 
man  to  struggle  for  the  kingdom  of  Or- 
muzd  against  the  kingdom  of  Ahriman, 
and  the  Christian  doctrine,  which  would 
make  man  struggle  in  the  service  of 
Christ  against  the  kingdom  of  Satan.     In 


But  this  argument  is  not  entirely  demon-  the  Persian  religion,  tlie  centre  point  of 
strative ;  for  without  this  supposition  it  all  was  the  idea  of  redemption  out  of  the 
may  well  be  conceived,  from  the  intimate   kingdom  of  Ahriman,  and  the   final   tri- 


connection  between  the  Persian  Christians 
and  the  Syrian  Church,  the  Syrian  lan- 
guage miglit  already  by  that  time  have 
become  the  language  of  theological  books 
among  the  Persian  religious  teachers,  and 
that  Manes  also  might,  in  consequence, 
have  been  induced  to  make  use  of  it, 
although  it  was  not  his  mother  tongue, 
more  especially  as  he  might  thereby  hope 
to  further  a  more  general  reception  of  his 
doctrines  in  other  districts.  If  these  ac- 
counts, indeed,  are  to  be  relied  on.  Manes 
was  born  in  a  family  of  the  class  of  Magi, 
(the  priests  of  the  Persian  religion,)  was 
converted  to  Christianity  in  the  days  of 
manhood,  and  became  the  presbyter  of  a 
Christian  congregation  at  Ehvaz,  or 
Ahvaz,  the  chief  town  of  the  Persian  pro- 
vince Huzitis.  At  all  events,  it  is  most 
probable  that  Manes  was  brought  up  in 
the  religion  of  Zoroaster,  and  afterwards 
embraced  Christianity. 

We  do  not  know  enough  of  the  pro- 
gress of  his  life  to  be  able  to  decide 
whether  he  was  at  first  fairly  and  tho- 
roughly converted  from  the  religion  of 
his  fathers  to  Christianity,  but  that  after- 
wards being  repulsed  by  the  form  in 
M'hich  the  latter  appeared  to  him  in  the 
doctrines  of  the  Church,  he  freshened  up 
the  fundamental  ideas  of  his  earlier  reli- 
gious habits  of  thought  again  in  his  soul, 
and  then  believed  tliat  the  true  light 
could  not  be  given  to  Christianity  till  it 

was  united  with  them; or 

whether  from  the  very  first  he  had  been 
attracted  by  the  analogy  of  Christianity  to 
many  Persian  notions,  without  remarking 
the  essential  difference  between  similar 
ideas  in  Christianity  and  in  tlic  Persian 
religion  according  to  their  peculiar  con- 


umph  of  the  kingdom  of  Ormnzd.  In 
Christianity  he  found  the  tidings  of  a 
triumphant  appearance  of  Ormuzd  him- 
self upon  the  earth,  through  which  the 
complete  triumph  of  the  kingdom  of 
Light,  and  the  complete  destruction  of  the 
kingdom  of  Darkness  were  prepared. 

Exacdy  at  the  time  in  which  Manes 
appeared,  after  the  Persians  had  freed 
tliemselves  from  the  Parthian  dominion, 
and  re-established  their  old  kingdom 
under  the  dynasty  of  the  Sassanida?,  the 
endeavour  was  again  awakened  among 
tliem  to  purify  the  old  religion  of  Zoro- 
aster from  the  foreign  admixtures  which 
had  made  their  Avay  into  it  during  a 
foreign  rule,  and  to  restore  it  again  to  its 
original  purity  and  glory.  But  contests 
had  now  arisen  as  to  what  the  pure  doc- 
trine of  Zoroaster  was,  especially  on 
those  points  on  which  the  Zend  books 
contained  only  hints,  (e.  g.  on  the  rela- 
tion of  the  good  and  the  evil  principle  to 
each  other.)  Councils  were  held,  in  order 
to  decide  the  disputes,  at  which  pretended 
prophets  appeared,  who  professed  to  de- 
cide every  thing  according  to  Divine  illu- 
mination.* The  religion  of  Zoroaster, 
thus  refreshed  with  new  power,  and  set- 
ting itself  up  in  hostility  to  all  foreign 
religions,  wliich  liad  hitherto  been  tole- 
rated, now  also  entered  on  a  contest  with 
Christianity,  which  under  the  Parthian 
domination  had  been  able  to  propagate 
itself  vvithout  obstruction.  Under  such 
circumstances,  it  was  easy  for  a  man  of 
an  ardent  and  bold  spirit,  like  Manes,  to 


*  See  Hyde,  Hist.  Relig.  vet.  Pers.  p.  276; 
Memoires  sur  diverses  Antiquites  dc  la  Perse, 
par  S.  de  Sacy,  p.  42. 


•  MANES    THE    PARACLETE. 


30c 


indulge  the  thought  of  establishing  the 
identity  of  Chrislianity,  purified,  as  he 
wowld  think,  from  all  extraneous  matter, 
with  the  pure  doctrine  of  Zoroaster,  and 
by  tliis  means  to  be  the  first  to  make 
clear  the  proper  meaning  of  the  Christian 
doctrine,  and  at  tlie  same  time  to  furdier 
the  extension  of  Christianity  in  the  Per- 
sian empire ;  he  wished  to  be  looked 
upon  as  the  Ref<irmer,  both  of  Chris- 
tianity and  Parsism,  called  and  enlightened 
by  God.  Christianity  appeared  to  Manes 
to  be  far  more  akin  to  the  doctrine  of 
Zoroaster  than  to  Judaism.  He  derived 
the  adulteration  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ 
from  the  mixture  of  Christianity  with 
Judaism,  which  was  entirely  foreign  to 
its  nature.  He  was  shut  out  from  the 
communion  of  the  Christian  Church,  and 
turned  himself  now  to  Christians  and  be- 
lievers in  the  religion  of  Zoroaster,  with 
the  desire  that  they  should  recognise  him 
as  an  inspired  (Zi/.  enlightened.)  reformer 
of  religion.  He  maintained,  like  Maho- 
met in  later  times,  that  he  was  the  Para- 
clete* promised  by  Christ,  and  under  this 
name  he  by  no  means  understood  the 
Holy  Ghost,  but  a  human  person  ;  an  in- 
spired teacher  promised  by  Clirist,  who 
should  carry  on'  further  the  religion  re- 
vealed by  Christ  in  his  Spirit  (i.  e.  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,)  should  purify  it  from 
the  mixture  made  in  it  by  Ahriman,  es- 
pecially from  those  corruptions  which 
proceeded  from  its  amalgamation  with 
Judaism,  and  should  make  known  those 
truths  wjiicli  mankind  in  earlier  times 
had  not  been  in  a  condition  to  understiiud. 
Through  him  Christianity  was  to  be  set 
free  from  all  connection  with  Judaism 
which  had  proceeded  from  Ahriman;  and 
that  which  the  evil  spirit,  in  order  to 
adulterate  Divine  truth,  had  intermingled 
v/ith  the  New  Testament,  which  by  no 
means  contained  the  uncorrupted  doctrine 
of  Christ,  was  to  be  separated  from  it. 
Through  him  that  perfcrj  knowledge  was 
to  be  given,  of  which  St.  Paul  had  spoken 
as  of  something  reserved  against  a  future 
season,  (1  Cor.  xiii.  lO.jt  T'lus  Manes 
might  name  tlie  promised  Paraclete  and 
the  apostle  of  Christ  at  tlie  same  time,  as 
he  began  the  letter  in  which  he  wished 
to  develope  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
his  religion  (the  Epistola  Fundamenli,  so 


•  See  Mirkhoiul  ap.  Sacy,  p.  294.  Tit.  Bost. 
f.  Manich.  lib.  iii.  in  Canisii  Lection,  antiq.  cd. 
Basnage,  and  Bibl.  Patr.  Galiand,  t.  v.  p.  326. 

-j-  See  the  Acta  cum  Felice  ManichiEO,  lib.  i.  9. 
opp.  Augustin.  t  viii. 

39 


celebrated  among  the  Manichees),  with 
these  words : — Manes,  chosen  to  be  an 
aposde  of  Jesus  Christ,  through  the 
choice  of  God  the  Father.  These  are  the 
words  of  salvation  out  of  the  living  anu 
eternal  source."* 

It  was  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of 
tlie  Persian  king  Shapur  I.  (Sapores,) 
about  the  year  "^70,  that  he  first  came 
forward  with  these  pretensions.  With 
an  ardent  and  profound  spirit,  and  with  a 
lively  imagination,  he  united  varied  know- 
ledge and  talents  for  the  pursuits  of  art 
and  science,  which  he  used  for  the  pro- 
pagation of  his  doctrines.  He  is  repre- 
sented as  having  been  distinguished 
among  his  contemporaries  and  country- 
men as  a  mathematician  and  astronomer  ;f 
the  fame  of  his  skill,  in  painting  was  long 
remembered  in  Persia.  At  fh-st  he  suc- 
ceeded in  obtaining  the  ftwour  of  that 
prince  ;  but  when  his  doctrines  which,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  magi,  were  heretical, 
became  known,  he  was  obliged  to  seek. 
safety  from  persecution,  by  flight.  He 
now  made  long  journeys  to  the  East  In- 
dies, as  far  as  China,  and  probably  used 
these  journeys  towards  the  enriching  of 
his  religious  eclecticism.  He  remained 
for  a  time  in  the  province  of  Turkistan, 
and  prepared  there  a  series  of  beautiful 
pictures,  vvh4ch  contained  a  symbolical 
representation  of  his  doctrine, — the  book 
which  was  named  by  the  Persians  Erten- 
ki-Mani.  It  may.  probably,  have  hap- 
pened that  he  withdrew  into  solitude  in 
order  to  receive  the  revelations  of  God, 
as  he  declared  that  he  devised  these 
images  (which  represented  his  concep- 
tions) amidst  calm  reflection  in  a  cavern, 
and  maintained  that  he  received  them 
in  his  mind;};  from  heaven.  Whether  it 
be  true,  as  the  Orientals  relate,  that  in 
order  to  deceive  the  credulous  populace, 
he  gave  out  that  he  raised  himself  in  the 
body  up  to  heaven,  and  thence  brought 
down  those  emblems  with  him,§  we  must 


*  Augustin.  c.  EpLstol.  Fundamenli,  c.  5. 

•j-  It  must,  however,  be  acknowlegcd  that  they 
pos.sessed  no  great  knowledge  in  these  subjects. 
It  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  much  in 
his  system,  even  if  we  cast  away  tlie  mythical 
dress  in  which  it  is  enveloped,  was  closely  con- 
nected with  an  imperfect  knowledge  of  these 
sciences. 

t  [In  seinem  Sinnc  .  .  This  may  be  explainetl, 
as  meaning  impressions  on  ike  scnsurium.  I 
have  used  the  word  mind,  taken  in  a  lax  sense — 
H.  J.  R.] 

§  He  must  secretly  have  caused  himself  to  be 
supplied  with  provisions  in  the  cavern,  where  he 
remained,  according  to  some,  /our  years,  according 
to  others,  one  year. 

2c2 


306 


at  least  leave  undecided.  After  the  death 
of  Sapor,  in  the  year  272,  he  returned  to 
Persia,  and  found  a  good  reception  for 
himself  and  his  pictures  at  the  hands  of 
his  successor,  Hormuz  (Hormisdes.)  This 
prince  assigned  him  as  a  secure  residence, 
a  castle  called  Deskereth,  at  Khuzistan, 
in  Susiana.  But  after  this  prince  had 
reigned  two  years  not  quite  complete, 
Behrarn  succeeded  him  (Baranes.)  This 
prince  showed  himself  favourable  to  him 
at  first,  but  perhaps,  only  out  of  dissimu- 
lation, in  order  to  give  him  and  his  ad- 
herents a  feeling  of  security.  He  caused 
a  disputation  to  be  held  between  him  and 
the  magi,  of  which  the  result  was  that 
Manes  was  declared  a  heretic.  As  he 
would  not  retract,  he  was*  flayed  alive  in 
the  year  277,t  and  his  skin  stuffed  and 
hung  up  before  the  gates  of  the  town 
Djondischapur,  in  order  to  intimidate  his 
followers. 

The  main  point  of  dispute  among  the 
Persian  theologians  which  was  treated  of 
at  the  restoration  of  the  original  religion 
by  the  founders  of  the  dynasty  of  the  Sas- 
sanidai,  was  one  which  is  most  obscurely 
expressed  in  the  documents  of  the  Zoro- 
astrian  creed,  (the  Zend-avesta,)  namely, 
the  inquiry,  whether  we  are  to  believe  in 
an  absolute  Dualism,  and  consider  Or- 
muzd  and  Ahriman  as  two  •self-existing 
beings  from  all  eternity  opposed  to  each 
other,  or  whether  om  original  being  is  to 
be  supposed,;};  from  whom  Ormuzd  and 
Ahriman  received  their  existence,  and 
that  Ahriman  is  an  originally-good  being, 
but  a  fallen  one.  The  former  doctrine 
was  that  of  the  Magusaic  sect,§  among 
the  Persians,  which  Manes  joined  \  for  it 
was  his  object  to  represent  the  opposition 
of  light  and  darkness  as  absolute  and  ir- 
reconcilable, although  either  consciously 
or  unconsciously,  a  pantheism,  which  was 
enveloped  in  a  mystical  dress,  might  be  at 
the  bottom  of  this  Dualism,  in  which  the 
idea  of  evil  was  conceived  more  in  a 
physical  than  in  an  ethical  light.||  He 
imagined,  therefore,  two  principles  abso- 
lutely opposed  to  each  other,  together 
with  their  creations  of  an  opposite  cha- 
racter also  :  on  the  one  hand,  God,  the 


DUALISM    OF   MANES — PARSI3M. 


*  A  cruel  mode  of  putting  criminals  to  death, 
common  in  the  East. 

I  The  ehronology  is,  it  must  be  confessed,  very 
uncertain  here. 

\  Zcrvan  Akarcne,  the  time  that  has  neither  be- 
ginning nor  end,  answering  to  the  a.\m  Bi;9oc. 
§  Schahristan.  ap,  Hyde,  p.  20.5. 

II  See  p.  238,  the  hitroduction  to  the  History  of 
the  Gnostic  Sects. 


original  good,  from  whom  nothing  but 
good  can  proceed,  from  whom  every  idea 
of  destroying,  of  punishing,  and  of  cor- 
ruption is  far  removed,  the  original  Light, 
from  which  pure  light  flows  ;  ....  on 
the  other  hand,  the  original  evil,  which 
can  only  destroy  and  undo,  and  whose 
very  being  is  wild  confusion  that  fights 
against  itself, — matter,  darkness,  from 
which  powers  strictly  corresponding  to 
itself  proceed,  a  world  full  of  smoke  and 
vapour,  and  at  the  same  time  full  of  fire, 
which  only  burns  and  cannot  give  light.* 
These  two  kingdoms  originally  existed 
entirely  separate  from  each  other.  The 
Supreme  God,  the  King  of  the  kingdom 
of  Light,  existed  as  the  original  source  of 
the  world  of  emanations  akin  to  himself, 
and  those  iCons,  the  channels  through 
which  light  was  propagated  from  the 
original  source  of  light,  were  most  closely 
connected  with  him ;  and  to  these,  as 
representatives  of  the  Supreme  God,  his 
very  name  was  transferred,  which  were 
thence  called  Divinities,  without  pre- 
judice to  the  honour  due  only  to  the  first 
of  Beings.!  In  the  epistle  in  which 
Manes  brought  forward  the  fundamental 
doctrines  of  his  religion.jJ;  he  thus  por- 
trays this  Supreme  God  at  the  head  of  his 
kingdom  of  Light  :§ 

"Over  the  kingdom  of  Light  ruled  God 
the  Father,  eternal  in  his  holy  nature, 
(geschlcchle^  lit.  generalion^  or  race^  or 
kind^  species^  genus,)  glorious  in  his 
power,  the  TRUE,  by  the  very  nature  of 
his  being,  always  holy  in  his  own  eter- 
nal existence,  who  carries  within  himself 
w'isdom  and  the  consciousness  of  his  life, 
with  which  he  comprehends  the  twelve 
members  of  his  Light,  that  is  to  say,  the 
overflowing  riches  of  his  own  kingdom. 
In  every  one  of  these  members  there  are 
hidden  thousands  of  innumerable  and  im- 
measurable treasures.  But  the  Fatlier 
himself,  who  is  splendid  in  his  glory  and 
incomprehensible  in  his  greatness,  has 
connected  with  him  holy  and  glorious 
^ons,  whose  number  and  greatness  can- 
not be  reckoned,  with  whom  this    holv 


*  The  emblems  under  which  Manes  represented 
the  kingdom  of  evil  bear  the  most  striking  resem- 
blance to  those  which  we  meet  with  in  the  reli- 
gious system  of  the  Sabians.  Tt  was  said,  and 
not  badly,  by  Alexander  of  Lycopolis,  in  his  trea- 
tise, TTgcc  Ta.c  Muvix'J-icu  iTc^ac,  c.  ii.,  that  Manes, 
under  the  word  Cm,  understood  tuv  iv  iKxa-rci  toiv 

OVTft'V  uTiKTOV  KlViia-lV. 

f  As  the  Amschaspands  Ized,  of  the  Religion 
of  the  Parsees. 

i  The  Epistola  Fundamenti. 

§  Augustin,  contra  Epist.  Fundamenti,  c.  13. 


DOMINION   OF   LIGHT — THE   MOTHER   OF   LIGHT. 


307 


all-glorious  Father  lives,  for  in  his  lofty 
kingdom  none  dwells  subject  either  to 
want  or  to  weakness.  His  resplendent 
kingdoms,  however,  are  founded  on  the 
blessed  earth  of  light  in  such  a  manner, 
that  they  can  neither  be  rendered  weak, 
nor  shaken  at  all."*  The  powers  of 
darkness  fell  together  in  wild  confusion, 
until  in  their  blind  career  of  strife  they 
came  so  close  to  the  kingdom  of  liglit, 
that  at  length  a  gleam  out  of  this  king- 
dom, which  had  hitherto  been  entirely 
unknown  to  them,  streamed  upon  them. 
They  now  left  off  their  contention  against 
one  another,  and,  involuntarily  attract-ed 
by  the  shining  of  the  Light,  they  united 
together  to  force  their  way  into  the  king- 
dom of  Light,  and  to  appropriate  to  them- 
selves some  portion  of  this  light.f  It  ap- 
pears here  somewhat  inconsistent  in 
Manes,  who  ascribes  an  impurturbable 
firmness  to  the  kingdom  of  Light,  to  say, 
"  But  when  the  Father  of  the  most  blessed 
Light  saw  a  great  devastation  arise  from 
the  darkness,  and  threaten  his  holy  iEons, 
had  he  not  sent  a  special  Divine  powerj 
to  conquer  and  annihilate  the  race  of 
darkness  at  once,  in  order  that  after  its 
annihilation  peace  might  be  the  portion 
of  the  dwellers  in  the  light."§  Simplicius 
and  Euodius  have  reproached  him  here 
with  a  contradiction  to  himself;  but  this 
accusation  relates  rather  to  the  mythical 
or  symbolical  mode  of  representation^  than 
to  the  train  of  thought  which  it  en- 
velopes. The  fundamental  notion  of 
Manes,  as  of  the  Gnostics,  was  this,  that 
the  blind  power  of  nature  which  opposed 
the  Divine  Being,  being  tamed  and  con- 
quered by  mixture  with  it,  would  be  ren- 
dered utterly  powerless. 


•  This  earth  of  light  Manes  did  not  conceive  as 
any  thing  distinct  from  tbe  original  Supreme 
Being,  but  all  was  only  a  dilTwent  modification  of 
the  one  Divine  Being  of  Light. 

-j-  We  recognise  the  idea  which  is  the  founda- 
tion of  this,  namely,  that  Evil  is  at  enmity  with 
itself,  and  unites  only  when  it  engages  in  a  con- 
test with  Good,  which  is  the  aUractive  power  with 
which  Good  acU  upon  Evil  itself;  a  thing  which 
cerUiinly  is  a  contradiction  to  the  Dualistic  dogma 
of  an  Absolute  Evil. 

i  Aliquod  nimium  ac  pr.-eclarum  ct  virtute  potens 
numen.  In  the  system  of  Zoroaster  also  the  Am- 
schaspands  is  represented  as  an  armed  champion 
for  the  kingdom  of  light. 

§  The  Epistola  Fundamenti  in  theBookrfe^rfe 
contra  Manichxos,  c.  11,  which,  perhaps,  pro- 
ceeded from  the  pen  of  Euodius,  bishop  of  Uzala, 
in  Numidia.  (This  is  to  be  found  in  the  Appendix 
lo  the  viiith  tome  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of 
Augustine.) 


The  King  of  the  kingdom  of  Light 
caused  the  iEon,  the  Mother  of  Life*  to 
emanate  from  him  to  protect  its  borders. 
The  very  name  of  this  Genius  shows  that 
it  represents  "  the  supreme  soul  of  the 
loorld,''''  that  the  Divine  light  giving  up 
the  unity  of  the  kingdom  of  light,  was 
now  to  divide  itself  into  a  multitude,  and 
develope  itself  in  the  struggle  against  the 
ungodly  into  separate  beings,  each  with  a 
pecul iar  existence.  The  Mother  of  Light, 
like  the  uvui  (ro^»«  of  the  Valentinian  sys- 
tem, may  not  have  been  afft;cted  as  yet 
by  the  kingdom  of  darkness  ....  and 
herein  would  also  lie  tlie  difference  be- 
tween the  higher  soul  of  the  world,  be- 
longing to  the  kingdom  of  light,  and  a 
re/lection  of  it,  which  had  mingled  itself 
with  the  kingdom  of  darkness.f  This 
Mother  of  Light  produced  the  First-man 
(original-man,)  in  order  to  set  him  in 
opposition  to  the  kingdom  of  darkness 
.  ,  .  .  and  here  is  the  idea  of  the  dig- 
nity of  human  nature,  which  we  ob- 
served among  the  Gnostics.J  The  First 
man  sets  out  upon  the  contest  Avith  the 
live  pure  elements,  fire,  light,  air,  water, 
and  earth. §  We  here  also  recognise  the 
character  of  Parsism,  the  veneration  of 
an  originally  pure  nature,  which  was 
troubled  only  by  being  intermixed  with 
Ahriman ;  and  according  to  the  Parsic 
doctrines,  a  life  streaming  forth  from  the 
kingdom  of  light  is  acknowledged  among 
the  original  elements,  and  they  are  called 
forth  through  its  fruitful  and  enlivenmg 
power,  as  fellow-champions  against  the 
destroying  influence  of  Ahriman. 

But  that  First  Man  was  conquered  in 
the  contest,  and  became  in  danger  of  fall- 
ing into  the  kingdom  of  Ahriman ;  he 
prays  to    the    King  of   the  kingdom  of 


-j-  Simplicius  in  Epictet.  p.  187.  ed.  Salmas. 
gives  an  excellent  portraiture  of  the  Manichajan 
doctrine    in    this  respect ;   olrt  to    vga>T;v   uytBov 

<Ji-/Jt-    sti/TU     (T-JVOVTi.,    Tm    /MITifX    T))C     ('oBXf,    KJU    TOY 

Jx/uKuey-'V  (the  ^av  ttvuiuu.)   nai  tow;  ix.u  stufvat. 

i  The  xga»Ti?  6vBe^u>r<,(  of  Manes  is  to  be  com- 
pared with  "the  ;rgai/ avWvTif  of  the  Valentinians, 
the  Adam  Kadmon,  and  especially  the  Cajomorts 
of  the  Zend-avcsta,  about  whom  there  are  many 
points  of  resemblance.  It  is  most  highly  probable 
that  Manes  received  this  Parsic  idea  into  his 
system. 

§  According  to  the  notion  of  Manes,  every 
thing  which  exists  in  the  kingdom  of  Light  has 
its  counterpart  in  the  kingdom  of  Darkness.  The 
dark  earth  stands  opposed  to  the  earth  of  li^ht, 
and  the  five  elements  of  darkness  are  opposed  to 
the  five  pure  elements. 


308 


THE    SOUL    OF   THE    WORLD.       YX»). 


Light,  who  causes  tlie  Living  Spirit  to 
emanate  in  order  to  assist  him.*  This 
lifts  him  lip  again  into  the  kingdom  of 
Light ;  but  the  powers  of  darkness  had 
already  succeeded  in  destroying  a  portion 
of  the  armour  of  the  First  Man,  and 
swallowing  up  a  portion  of  his  existence 
as  a  being  of  light ;  and  thus  we  arrive 
at  the  notion  of  the  Soul  of  the  World 
mixed  with  matter.!  Here  we  find  also 
an  affinity  with  the  Gnostic  notions,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  xcctu  cotpia.  was 
saved  out  of  the  kingdom  of  Hyle  by 
means  of  the  Soter  sent  to  her  assistance ; 
but  still  it  was,  nevertheless,  a  seed  of  the 
Divine  Life,  falleii  down  into  the  matter, 
which  (i.  e.  the  seed,)  must  be  purified 
and  developed.;!;  This  must  necessarily 
happen  ;  through  the  magical  power  of 
the  Divine  Life,  of  the  Light  of  the  Soul, 
the  wild  stormy  kingdom  of  darkness  is 
to  become  involuntarily  softened,  and  at 
last  rendered  powerless.  The  taming  of 
that  stormy,  blind  power  of  Nature  is 
just  the  very  object  of  the  formation  of 
the  world.  Manes  is  said  to  have  at- 
tempted to  make  his  doctrine  intelligible 
by  the  following  parable  :  A  good  shep- 
herd sees  a  lion  fall  upon  liis  flock,  he 
digs  a  pit,  and  throws  a  he-goat  into  it ; 
the  lion  runs  up  eagerly  in  order  to  de- 
vour the  goat;  but  he  falls  into  the  pit 
and  cannot  get  out  of  it  again.  The 
shepherd,  however,  succeeds  in  drawing 
up  the  goat  again,  while  he  leaves  the 
lioli  shut  up  in  the  pit,  and  thereby  ren- 
ders him  harmless  to  his  flock  ;§ — just  as 
the  kingdom  of  Darkness  becomes  harm- 
less, and  the  souls  swallowed  up  by  it 
are  at  last  saved,  and  brought  back  again 
to  their  kindred  liabitution.  But  now 
after  tlie  Living  Spirit  had  raised  man 
again  to  the  kingdom  of  Light,  he  began 
preparations  for  the  process  of  purifying 
the  soul  (hat  is  intermingled  with  the  king- 
dom of  Darkness^  and  this  is  the  cause 
of  the  whole  creation  of  the  world,  and 
the  object  of  all  the  whole  course  of  the 
world. II     That  portion  of  the  soul  which 


had  not  been  affected  by  connection  with 
matter,  or  with  the  Being  of  Darkness, 
he  raised  up  above  the  earth,  so  that 
it  should  have  its  place  in  the  sun  and 
in  the  moon,  and  thence  should  spread 
forth  its  influence,  in  order  to  free  the 
souls  which  were  akin  to  it,  and  which 
v.'ere  held  captive  by  the  kingdom  of 
Darkness,  and  spread  abroad  over  all 
nature,  through  the  purifying  process  of 
the  development  of  the  vegetative  and 
animal  life,  and  thus  to  attract  them  to 
itself  again. 

Manes  also,  in  a  manner  similar  to  the 
Parsic  conception  of  the  universe,  beheld 
the  same  struggle  between  Ormuzd  and 
Ahriman,  and  the  same  process  of  purifi- 
cation in  tlie  physical  as  well  as  in  the 
moral  world,  hi  contradiction  to  the 
spirit  of  Christianity,  he  mixed  the  phy- 
sical with  the  religious  and  ethic,  founded 
doctrines  of  belief  and  morals  on  specula- 
tive cosmogonies,  and  a  natural  philoso- 
phy, which  being  deduced  more  from  in- 
ward conceptions  than  from  experimental 
knowledge,  must  often  have  been  imintel- 
ligible.  Such  a  mixture  was  alike  pre- 
judicial to  religion,  which  became  flooded 
by  a  multitude  of  things  wholly  foreign 
to  it  and  to  knowledge,  which  thus  is 
compelled  to  lose  that  soberness  of  un- 
derstanding which  is  necessary  to  her.* 
Just  as  in  the  Parsic  system  of  religion, 
in  the  struggle  between  Ormuzd  and 
Ahriman  in  the  physical  and  the  spiritual 
world,  the  sun  and  the  moon  perform  an 
important  part  in  the  conduct  of  the  gen- 
eral system  of  development   and  purifica- 


*  The  ifajv  TrnvfAtt  in  the  Gnostic  Acta  Thomtc, ' 
which  contain  much  that  resembles  Manicheeism. 

■j"   The.  ■\u^)f  aTrrtvrm. 

i,  Titus  of  Bostra,  lib.  i.  c.  Manich.  c.  12,  thus 
excellently    portrays    the   Manichccan    doctrine: 

§  Disputat.  cum  Archelao,  c.  2.5.  This  parable 
bears  altogether  the  stamp  of  genuineness,  at  least 
it  is  in  the  spirit  of  Manicheeism. 

II  Just  as  in  the  Valentinian  scheme,  the  Soter 
operates  after  he  has  first  raised  the  Sophia. 


*  How  little  Manicheeism  understood  the  in- 
terests of  religion  and  the  nature  of  Christianity  ; 
how  little  it  understood  the  one  thing  needful  for 
man,  is  shown  by  the  remarkable  words  in  which 
Felix,  the  Manichee,  endeavoured  to  prove  that 
Manes  was  the  reformer  of  religion  (the  Paraclete,) 
promised  by  Christ/  "  Et  quia  venit  Manichseus 
et  per  suam  predicationem  docuit  nos  initlum, 
medium  et  finem ;  docuit  nos  de  fabrica  mundi, 
quare  facta  est  et  undo  facta  est,  et  qui  fecerunt ; 
docuit  nos  quare  dies  et  quare  nox ;  docuit  nos  de 
cursu  solis  et  luna; ;  quia  hoc  in  Paulo  nee  in 
cajterorum  apostolorum  Scripturis,  hoc  credimus, 
quia  (dass,  that)  ipse  est  Paracletus."  Augustin. 
Acta.  c.  Felice  Manicha;o,  lib.  i.  c.  9.  In  Alex- 
ander  of  Lycopolis,  in  Egypt,  the  opponent  of 
Manicheeism  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, we  find  the  opposite  error  to  this  of  a  dilution 
of  Christianity,  which,  mistaking  its  peculiar  and 
css^ntial  features,  refers  it  only  to  certain  general 
religious  and  moral  truths,  torn  away  from  that 
with  which  they  are  connected  in  Christianity. 
With  him  the  chief  matter  of  Christianity  is  the 
doctrine  of  an  eternal  God,  as  Creator,  and  good 
morality  for  the  people.  See  the  beginning  of 
his  treatise  against  the  Manichees. 


CHRIST   CRUCIFIED    EVERY   WHERE. 


309 


tion,  so  also  was  it  in  the  system  of 
Manes.  Almost  what  the  Zoroastric  sys- 
tem taught  of  Mithras  as  the  Genius  (Ized,) 
of  tlie  Sun,  was  attributed  by  Manes  to 
liis  Christ,  the  pure  soul,  whose  opera- 
tions proceeded  from  out  of  the  sun  and 
the  moon.  As  he  derived  this  soul  from 
the  original  matu  he  made  this  the  expla- 
nation of  the  Bible-name,  the  Son  of  Man^ 
(yiof  uvb^uTTov.,)  and  as  he  distinguished 
the  pure,  free  soul,  whose  throne  is  in 
the  sun,  from  the  soul  which  is  akin  to  it, 
and  extended  throughout  all  nature,  but 
defiled  and  imprisoned  by  its  mixture  with 
matter ;  he  also  made  a  distinction  be- 
tween a  Son  of  Man  elevated  above  all 
connection  with  matter,  and  subject  to 
no  suflering,  and  a  Son  of  Man  crucified, 
as  it  were,  in  matter,  and  subject  to  suf- 
fering.* Where  the  seed  sown  burst 
forth  out  of  the  dark  bosom  of  the  earth, 
and  developed  itself  into  plants,  blossoms, 
and  fruit,  there  jManes  saw  the  victorious  ' 
development  of  the  principle  of  Light  free-  , 
ing  itself  by  degrees  from  the  fetters  of 
matter ;  and  he  saw  here  that  the  living 
soul,  as  it  were,  which  is  kept  bound 
in  the  limbs  of  the  Princes  of  Darkness, 
being  released  from  them,  soars  up  aloft 
in  freedom,  and  mingles  in  the  pure  at- 
mosphere,'\  where  tlie  souls,  which  are 
perfectly  purified,  ascend  the  Ships  of 
Light  (of  the  sun  and  of  the  moon,) 
which  are  prepared  to  conduct  them  to 
their  native  place.  But  that  which  bears 
upon  it  multifarious  stains  is  by  degrees 
and  in  small  quantities  distilled  from 
themlj;  by  the  power  of  heat,  and  mingles 
itself  with  all  trees,  plants,  and  vegetables. 
These  were  samples  of  his  mystical 
philosophy  of  nature,  which  were  brought 
forward  sometimes  in  singular  myths, 
which,  although  occasionally  indecent, 
were  nothing  very  remarkable  to  the 
imagination  of  Oriental  people,  and  some- 
times under  the  covering  of  Christian  ex- 
pressions. Thus  the  Manichees  could 
speak  of  a  suffering  Son  of  Man  who 
hangs  on  every  tree,  of  a  Christ  crucified 
in  every  soul  and  in  the  whole  world, 
and  they  could  explain  the  symbols  of 
the  suffering  Son  of  Man  in  the  Last  Sup- 

*   The  vim  M^fomu  i/nTra-Sn;  and  the  ulo;  avSporct/ 

■\  The  pure  holy  air,  which  is  exactly  in  accor- 
dance with  the  Parsic  Worship  of  Pvature,  and 
a  common  term  in  the  Zend-avesta. 

t  [I  have  some  doubt  as  to  the  construction  of 
the  original  sentence.  But  I  conceive  the  'ihnen,' 
'from  them,''  to  refer  to  the  purified  souls, — that 
these  stains  are  separated  from  them. — H.  J.  R.] 


per  according  to  their  own  sense.  Just 
as  well,  also,  or  rather  with  greater  justice 
— for  this  intermixture  of  religion  with 
the  knowledge  of  nature  was  more  hea- 
then tlum  Christian — the  Manichees  might 
use  heathen  myths  as  a  covering  for  their 
ideas;  and  thus  the  boy,  Dionysos,  torn 
to  pieces  by  the  Titans,  as  celebrated  in 
the  Bacchic  mysteries,  is  nothing  but  the 
soul  swallowed  up  by  the  powers  of  dark- 
ness, the  Divine  life  divided  into  pieces 
by  matter.* 

The  Powers  of  Darkness  were  now 
threatened  by  the  danger,  that  by  means 
of  the  operation  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun 
upon  the  purifying  process  of  Nature,  all 
the  Light  and  Life  kept  prisoners  in  their 
members  would  be  by  degrees  withdrawn 
from  them,  namely,  the  soul  which  had 
been  seized  upon  by  them,  which  struggles 
after  a  release,  and  which  is  always  at- 
tracted by  the  kindred  spirit  of  the  Sun, 
constantly  frees  itself  more  and  more  and 
flees  away,  so  that  at  last  the  kingdom  of 


*   See  Alexand.  Lycopol.  c.  6.     The  followinir 
are  a   few   peculiarly  characteristic   Manicheean 
passages,  as  proofs  of  the  expose  given  above.    In 
the  Thesaurus  of   Manes  the  following  passage 
occurs :  "  Viva  anima,  qus  carundem  (adversarum 
potestatum)    rnembris    tenebatur,    hac    occasione 
lunata  evadit,  et  suo  purissimo  aeri  miscetur:  ubi 
penitus  abluts  anim®  adscendunt  ad  lucidas  naves, 
qua;  sibi  ad  evectionem  atque  ad  suae  patrise  trans- 
fretationem  sunt  prfeparatse.     Id  vero  quod  adhuc 
adversi  generis  maculas  portat,  per  sstum  atque 
calores    particulatim   descendit   atque    arboribus, 
cffiterisque  plantationibus  ac  satis  omnibus  misce- 
tur."    Euodius  de  Fide,  c.  14.     From  the  Letter 
of  Manes  to  the  maiden  Menoch,  we  have  this 
passage :  "  agnoscendo  ex  quo  genere  animarum 
emanaveris,  quod  est  confusum  omnibus  corpori- 
j  bus,  et  saporibus   et   speciebus  variis   cohaeret." 
i  Augustin.  opus  imperfectum  contra  Julian,  hb.  iii. 
1  §  172.     There  is  also  a  passage  of  Faustus,  the 
j  Manichee,  who  Uved  in  the  first  half  of  the  fifth 
'  century,  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  is  represented 
as  the  enhvening  and  sanctifying  power  of  God, 
working  through  the    air  towards  the  purifying 
1  process  of  ISature;  and  the  doctrine  of  the  birth 
of  Christ  from  the  Virgin  (which  the  Manichees, 
being  Doceta;,  cannot  agree  to  in  its  proper  sense,) 
j  is  represented  as  a  symbol  of  the  birth  of  that 
I  patibilis  Jesus  from  the  virgin  bosom  of  the  earth 
through  the  operation  of  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost:  "Spiritus  sancti,  qui  est  inajcstas  tcrtia, 
I  aeris  hunc  omnem  ambitum  sedem   fatemur  ac 
^  diversorium,  cujus  ex  viribus  ac  spiritali  profusione 
terram    quoque   concipientem   gignere   patibileni 
Jesum,  qui  est  vita  ac  salus  hominum,  omni  sus- 
pensus  ex  ligno.     Quapropler  et  nobis  circa  uni- 
vcrsam  (i.e.  all  productions  of  Nature,  considered 
as  revelations  of  the  same  Divine  principle  of  lift, 
suflering  under  the  imprisonment  of  matter,  reve- 
lations of  the  same  Jesus  Patibilis,)  et  vobis  simi- 
liter erga  panem  et  calicem  par  rcligio  est."     Au- 
gust, c.  Faust,  c.  XX. 


310 


MAN    A   MICROCOSM. 


Darkness,  robbed  of  all  its  stolen  Light, 
should  be  wholly  abandoned  to  its  own 
inward  hatefiilness  and  to  its  death. 
What  then  was  to  be  done  ?  A  Being 
was  to  be  produced,  into  which  the  Soul 
of  Nature,  that  struggles  to  free  itself, 
should  be  driven  and  fast  bound,  in  which 
all  the  scattered  Light  and  Life  of  Na- 
ture, all  which  the  Powers  of  Darkness 
kept  imprisoned  in  their  members,  and 
which  was  constantly  more  and  more  en- 
ticed away  from  them  by  the  power  of 
the  Sun,  is  concentrated ;  this  is  The 
Man,  the  image  of  the  Original  Man,  and 
therefore,  already  destined  tlirough  his 
form  to  rule  over  nature.*  The  matter 
stands  thus.  The  Lofty  Light-Form  of 
the  original  Man  (which  was  also  appa- 
rently peculiar  to  the  Son  of  Man  dwell- 
ing in  the  Sun)!  sends  down  light  from 
the  Sun  into  the  kingdom  of  Darkness, 
or  the  Material  World  ;  the  Powers  of 
Darkness  are  seized  with  desire  after  the 
Light-Form,  but  with  confusion  also. 
Their  Prince  now  speaks  to  them:  "What 
think  ye  that  great  Light  to  be  which 
rises  up  yonder  ?  Behold !  how  it  shakes 
the  pole,  how  it  strikes  to  earth  many  of 
our  Powers !  Therefore,  is  it  fitting,  that 
ye  should  rather  bestow  on  me  whatso- 
ever ye  have  of  Light  in  your  powers ;  and 
then  I  will  make  an  image  of  that  Great 
One,  which  appears  full  of  glory,  through 
which  we  may  rule,  and  may  hereafter 
free  ourselves  from  our  abode  in  Dark- 
ness." Thus  human  nature  is  the  image, 
in  this  dark  world,  of  higher  existence, 
through  which  the  higher  (every  thing  of 
a  higher  nature)  may  be  attracted  hither 
and  held  fast.  Afier  they  had  heard  this, 
and  had  consulted  together  for  a  long 
time,  they  thought  it  best  to  fulfil  his  de- 
sire, for  they  did  not  believe  that  this 
Light  could  long  maintain  itself  among 
ihcm^X  and  therefore,  they  considered  it 
best  to  offer  it  to  their  Prince,  because 
they  did  not  doubt  that  by  this  means 
they  should  obtain  the  predominance. 
The  Powers  of  Darkness  now  paired 
themselves,  and  begat  chihlren,  in  whom 
their  common  natures  and  powers  were 
again  represented,  and  in  whom  every 
thing  which  tliey  had  of  the  essence  of 
Light  and  Darkness  in  them  reproduced 
itself  All  these  children  of  theirs  the 
Prince  of  Darkness  devours,  and  by  this 


means  concentrates  in  himself  all  the 
Light-Existence  which  was  spread  abroad 
among  the  individual  Powers  of  Dark- 
ness, and  he  produced  Man,  in  whom  all 
the  powers  of  the  kingdoms  of  Darkness 
and  of  Light,  which  had  here  inter- 
mingled with  each  other,  assembled  to- 
gether. Hence  Man  is  considered  as  a 
microcosm, — a  reflection  of  the  whole 
world  of  Light  and  of  Darkness,  a  mirror 
of  all  the  Powers  of  the  Heaven  and  of 
the  Earth.* 


*  Compare  the  parallel  doctrines  of  the  Ophites. 
-\  Alcxand.  Lycopoiit.c.4,  ducvi  Si  h  KKm  laf^a-- 
6a;   TctituTnv,  CM  io-'ri   ro   tcu  &v(i^a>7rcu  tiJo;. 
^  This  K  the  most  important  matter. 


*  Manes,  Ep.  Fundamenti ;  Augustin.  de  Na- 
tura  Boni,  c.  46.  Construebantur  et  contine- 
bantur  omnium  imagines,  coelestium  ac  terrcnarum 
virtutum  :  ut  pleni  videlicet  orbis,  id  quod  forma- 
batur,  similitudinem  obtineret.  We  must  not 
here  suppress  the  fact,  that  in  respect  to  the  main 
matter  of  the  formation  of  man  a  so/newhai  dif- 
ferent construction  of  the  Manicheean  system  is 
possible ;  which  Mosheim,  with  his  peculiar  acute- 
ness,  has  thoroughly  worked  out,  and  for  which 
certainly  something  of  weight  may  be  advanced. 
Unfortunately,  the  gaps  which  have  been  left  in 
the  extant  fragments  of  Manes,  which  are  the 
most  secure  foundation  for  any  account  of  his 
system,  are  loo  great  to  allow  us  to  decide  the 
inquiry  by  his  own  words.  We  have  followed 
that  mode  of  construction  by  which  man  was 
supposed  to  be  created  later  than  the  rest  of  Na- 
ture, in  order  to  keep  fast  in  Nature  the  soul 
whose  tendency  was  to  escape.  The  last  quoted 
words  of  Manes  appear  to  support  this  represen- 
tation. So  also  does  the  Disputat.  Archelai,  ^  7, 
as  well  as  the  words  of  Alexander  of  Lycopolis, 
about  the  form  of  man  shedding  down  light  from 
the  sun.  It  would  then  be  the  same  Spirit  of  the 
Sun,  who.  after  the  lirst  separation  of  Light  from 
Darkness,  operating  upon  the  purifying  process  of 
Nature,  had  put  the  Powers  of  Darkness  (who 
feared  to  be  therel)y  robbed  of  all  their  spiritual 
being  which  constantly  escaped  from  them)  into 
confusion,  and  which  afterwards  appeared  in 
Christ  as  the  Redeemer.  To  this  the  passage  of 
Alexand.  Lycop.  appears  to  point,  c.  4,  t;v  Sh 
XwtTTCv  siva/  v'.vv,  oh  J«  h-ju  a.<ptK'^uivcv  Trcn,  (then, 
when  the  Powers  of  Darkness  endeavoured,  by  the 
formation  of  man,  to  retain  the  soul  which  threat- 
ened to  escape  from  them,  and  thus  to  frustrate 
the  work  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun,)  wxt-o-Tcv  t;  t« 
SvvJfAiui;  rai/rx;,  w^ic  rev  &i'-v  Kiwuv^ti  mi  Stt  to 
TiXi-jToitcv,  &c.  The  fragments  also  of  a  Manichee 
in  the  preface  to  the  Third  Division  of  'J'itus  of 
Bostra,  may  be  conveniently  explained  in  the 
same  manner. 

But  we  might  also,  with  Mosheim,  set  the  for- 
mation of  Man  in  the  system  of  Manes  befu7-e  the 
ivltole  creation  of  the  world.  The  Powers  of 
Darkness  were  disturbed  at  the  appearance  of  the 
<J&)V  TTvwuu..  which  threatened  to  tear  away  from 
them  all  the  souls  they  had  seized  upon.  Hence 
they  now  united  themselves  in  order  to  form  Man, 
after  the  image  of  that  original  Man,  wlioni  they 
saw  shining  from  afar  (this  was  that  'ille  niagnus 
qui  gloriosus  apparuit,')  in  order  that  they  might 
through  him  enchant  and  hold  fast  tlic  souls 
which  the  Living  Spirit  threatened  to  rob  tliem  of. 
I  It  was,  then,  after  the  intention  of  the  Living 


ALLEGORICAL   MEANING    OF    PARADISE. 


311 


That  which  is  here  described,  is  re- 
pealed conslanthj  in  the  course  of  JS'ature, 
when  at  the  birth  of  a  man,  the  wild 
poioers  of  Matter,  the  Powers  of  Dark- 
ness, pairing  themselves  together,  produce 
a  human  JVature,  in  which  they  mingle 
together  whatsoever  they  have  botJi  of  the 
higher  and  of  the  lower  Life,  and  in 
ivhich  they  endeavour  to  fetter  the  Soul 
of  JWUure,  which,  while  it  struggles  after 
freedom,  is  held  prisoner  by  them* 

Also,  according  to  the  Manicheean 
scheme,  the  Powers  of  Darkness  are  in- 
voluntarily subservient  to  a  higher  law, 
and  by  their  machinations  against  the 
kingdom  of  Light,  prepare  destruction 
for  themselves  The  Light,  (lit.  Liglit 
Nature,  or  particles  partaking  of  the  es- 
sential attributes  of  Light)  or  the  Soul, 
concentrated  in  man's  nature,  thereby 
only  arrives  the  sooner  at  a  conscious- 
ness of  itself,  and  at  the  development  of 
its  own  peculiar  nature.  As  the  common 
Soul  of  the  World  endeavours  to  subject 
to  itself  all  existing  Matter,  i.  e.  the  great  j  world.f"     But  an  angel  of  Light,  or  rather 


was,  therefore,  endued  with  pre-eminent 
powers.  But  yet,  in  consequence  of  its 
double  descent,  the  Nature  of  the  First 
Man  consisted  of  two  opposite  parts  ;  the 
one  a  soul  akin  to  the  kingdom  of  Light, 
already  in  possession  of  the  fulness  of  its 
power,  and  the  other  a  body  akin  to  the 
kingdom  of  Darkness,  together  with  a 
blind  matter-born  capability  of  desire, 
which  it  derived  from  the  same  kingdom.* 
Under  these  circumstances,  all  depend- 
ed, with  the  Powers  of  Darkness,  on  their 
being  able  to  oppress  the  Light-Nature 
which  had  been  superinduced  on -man, 
and  to  retain  it  in  a  condition  of  uncon- 
sciousness. Tliey  invited  man  to  eat  of 
all  the  trees  of  Paradise,  that  is,  to  enjoy 
all  earthly  desires,  while  they  only  wished 
to  restrain  him  from  eating  of  the  tree  of 
the  knowledge  of  Good  and  Evil,  that  is, 
from  attaining  to  a  consciousness  of  the 
opposition  between  Light  and  Darkness, 
or  between  the  Divine  and  the  Ungodly 
in    his    own    nature,  and    in    the    whole 


Body  of  the  World,  so  must  this  Soul, 
derived  as  it  is  from  the  same  origin  as 
that,  govern  this  miniature  material  world. 
"The  first  soul,"  says  Manes,t  "  which 
flowed  forth  from  the  God  of  Light,  re- 
ceived this  form  of  the  body,  in  order 
that  it  might  govern  the  body  by  its 
restraints,  {lit.  bridle.")  The  soul  of  the 
First  Man,j;  as  standing  nearer  to  tlie 
Original  Source  of  the  kingdom  of  Light, 


Spirit,  to  free  at  once  the  imprisoned  souls,  had 
been  frustrated  by  these  machinations,  that  he  for 
the  first  time  thought  of  the  creation  of  the  world, 
in  order  to  effect  by  dcgreai,  what  he  had  been 
prevented  from  accomplishing  at  once.  The 
words  of  Alexander  of  Lycopolis,  who,  however, 
did  not  find  himself  quite  at  home  in  the  train  of 
thought  belonging  to  the  Manicheean  system,  ap- 
pear to  support  this  view,  when  he  accuses  the 
Manicheean  system  of  inconsistency,  (Inconse- 
queiiz :)  c.  23,  h  iWite  ii  Tuy  tixiva  (rcu  ufS/Kn^ot/) 
taigaa-Sa;  Krycuyiv,  oc  iytJiTo  kxt  u-jtcu;  dTro  m;  tt^o; 
mv  Ckhv  ^iTTsgcv  inKfiTUD^,  for,  according  to  these 
words,  (if  Alexander  has  understood  Manes  pro- 
perly, or  the  Manichce  whose  works  he  read,  has 
properly  represented  the  doctrines  of  his  master,) 
Manes  must  have  imagined  the  separation  of  the 
soul  unaffected  by  Matter,  or  of  the  Spirit  of  the 
Sun,  to  have  taken  place  before  the  rest  and  after 
the  formation  of  man. 

*  The  words  of  Manes,  1.  c,  are  these,  "sicuti 
etiam  nunc  fieri  videmus,  corporum  formatricem 
naturain  mali  inde  vires  sumentem  figurare." 
These  words  seem  important  as  a  hint,  which  in- 
dicates the  symbolical  meaning  of  the  whole  nar- 
ration. 

-j-  In  the  letter  quoted  above. 

^  "  Quasi  de  primae  facta  floro  substantia;," 
says  Manes,  1.  c. 


the  Spirit  of  the  Sun  himself,  persuaded 
man  to  transgress  the  commandment, 
that  is,  he  led  him  to  that  consciousness 
which  the  Powers  of  Darkness  wished  to 
withhold  from  him,  and  thereby  secured 
him  the  victory  over  them.  This  is  the 
truth,  which  is  the  foundation  of  that  nar- 
rative of  Genesis,  only  we  must  change 
the  persons  engaged  in  the  transaction, 
and  instead  of  God  we  must  put  the  Prince 
of  Darkness,  and  instead  of  the  Serpent 
we  must  put  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun.\ 

As  now  the  kingdom  of  Light  had 
triumphed  over  the  Powers  of  Darkness, 
the  latter  made  use  of  a  new  means,  in 
order  to  take  prisoner  the  Light-Nature, 
which  had  now  attained  to  self-conscious- 


•  The  •[yx."  <»>^5>5c. 

•|-  SeeDisputat.  Archelai,  c.  10. 

%  This  would  be  the  explanation  of  the  doc- 
trine of  Manes,  if  the  representation  given  by  the 
.Manichee  in  Titus  of  Bostra,  (at  the  end  of  the 
preface  to  Section  III.,)  be  the  original  one ; 
and  it  may  be  said  that  it  suits  the  Manicheean  sys- 
tem extremely  well,  and  dovetails  in  with  the  ac- 
count given  of  it  in  the  Disputation  of  Archelaus. 
It  may,  perhaps,  surprise  us,  that  Manes,  who  was 
brought  up  in  the  Parsic  religion,  should  have 
made  tlie  serpent,  which  among  the  Parsees  is  the 
symbol  of  Ahriman,  into  the  symbol  of  the  Good 
Spirit;  but  according  to  the  view  given  above  this 
consideration  forms  no  difficulty.  As  he  saw  in 
the  religious  documents  of  the  Jews  so  many  cor- 
ruptions derived  from  the  Spirit  of  Darkness,  he 
saw  his  corruptions  and  falsifying  influence  ex- 
erted also  in  a  wilful  corruption  of  this  narrative, 
by  changing  the  places  of  those  engaged  in  the 
transaction. 


312 


DESTINATIOX    OF   MAN. 


ness,  and  to  detach  it  from  its  connection 
with  its  original  Source.  They  seduced 
the  First  Man,  by  means  of  the  Eva  be- 
stowed upon  him  as  a  companion,  into 
giving  himself  up  to  fleshly  desires,  and 
thereby,  becoming  untrue  to  his  nature 
as  a  Being  of  Light,  to  make  himself  the 
servant  of  a  foreign  domination.*  The 
consequence  which  flowed  thence  was, 
that  the  Soul,  which  by  its  original  power 
ought  to  raise  itself  into  the  kingdom  of 
Light,  divided  itself  by  propagation,  and 
became  enclosed  anew  in  material  bodies, 
so  that  the  Powers  of  Darkness  could  for- 
ever repeat  what  they  had  done  at  the 
production  of  the  First  Man. 

Every  man  also  has  now  the  same  des- 
tination as  the  first,  namely,  to  rule  by 
means  of  the  power  of  the  Spirit  over 
matter.  Every  one  consists  of  the  same 
two  parts,  of  which  the  nature  of  the  first 
man  consisted,  and  therefore,  all  depends 
upon  this,  that  man  remembering  his 
origin,  should  know  how  to  separate  these 
two  parts  properly  from  each  other.  He 
who  thinks  that  he  has  received  his  sen- 
suous nature,  (sinnlichkeit,)  together  with 
its  appetites,  from  God, — lie  who  does 
not  know  from  tlie  very  first  origin  of 
human  nature,  that  it  (viz.  this  sinnlich- 
keit,  or  his  corporeal  and  sensuous  en- 
dowments,) proceeds  from  the  kingdom 
of  Darkness,  Avill  easily  allow  himself  to 
be  seduced  into  serving  his  senses,  and 
thereby  lose  his  higher  Light-Nature,  and 
become  unfaithful  to  the  kingdom  of 
Light.  Therefore,  does  Manes  say  in  his 
Letter  of  Principles,  (Epistola  Funda- 
menti,)  "  ff  it  had  been  given  to  man  to 
know  clearly  the  whole  condition  of 
Adam's  and  Eve's  origin,  they  would 
never  have  been  subjected  to  decay  and 
death."  And  hence,  also,  he  writes  to  j 
the  virgin  Menoch|  thus :  "  May  our 
God  himself  enlighten  thy  soul, and  reveal 
to  thee  thy  righteousness,  because  thou 
art  the  fruit  of  a  godly  stem.J   Thou  also 


*  As  we  have  no  accounts  of  the  arrangement 
of  these  events  in  the  Manicheean  system  as  to  the 
time  of  their  occurrence,  we  may  also  place  their 
relations  to  each  other  in  a  different  manner.  It 
may  be  supposed  that  Adam  first  allowed  himself 
to  be  seduced  into  sin,  but  afterwards  being 
brought  by  the  influence  nf  the  8un-Spirit  to  a 
consciousness  of  the  opposition  between  the  flesh 
and  the  Spirit,  and  Light  and  Darkness,  that  he 
began  a  more  holy  life.  See  Augustin.  de  Mori- 
bus  Manichfeorum,  lib.  ii.  19. 

f  Augustin.  op.  imperfect,  c.  Julian,  lib.  iii. 
§  172. 

i  The  Revelation  consists  in  man's  being 
Drought  to  a  consciousness  of  his  Light-Nature.      I 


hast  become  Light,  by  recognising  what 
thou  wast  before,  and  from  what  race  of 
Souls  thou  art  sprung,  which  being  inter- 
mingled with  all  bodies  is  connected  with 
various  forms  ;  for  as  souls  are  engen- 
dered by  souls,  so  is  the  form  of  the  body 
composed  of  the  nature  of  the  body. 
That  also,  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is 
flesh,  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  .spirit 
is  spirit.  But  know  that  the  spirit  is  the 
soul,  soul  of  soul,  flesh  of  flesh."*  lie 
then  appealed  to  the  custom  of  infant 
bcqjfmn,  loMch  roas  even  then  prevalenf.  in 
the  Parsic  Church,  as  a  proof  that  Chris- 
tians themselves,  by  their  mode  of  pro- 
ceeding, took  for  granted  such  an  original 
defilement  of  man's  nature.  "  I  inquire," 
he  says,  in  the  Letter|  we  have  quoted, 
"  whether  all  evil  is  actual  evil }  Where- 
fore, then,  does  any  one  receive  purifica- 
tion by  means  of  water,  before  he  has 
done  any  evil,  as  he  cannot  possibly  liave 
been  obnoxious  to  evil  i7i  Jiis  own  ]}crson  ? 
But  inasmuch  as  he  has  been  the  subject 
of  no  evil,  and  yet  must  be  purified,  they 
point  out  ipso  facto,  a  descent  from  an 
evil  race ;  even  they  themselves,  whose 
fancy  will  not  allow  them  to  understand 
what  they  say,  nor  what  they  assume." 

The  particle  of  Light  (UtcraUy,  the 
Light-Nature,)  which  from  its  removal 
from  the  source  of  that  concentrated  Ex- 
istence-of-Light  (literally,  Light-Being)  in 
the  person  of  Adam,  from  which  all  souls 
emanated,  was  constantly  becoming  more 
and  more  defiled  through  its  continued 
connection  with  matter, — so  that  it  now 
remained  no  longer  in  possession  of  the 
original  power  which  it  had,  Avhen  it  first 
flowed  forth  fresh  from  the  original  source 
of  the  kingdom  of  Light.  The  Law, 
however,  presupposes  the  original  power 
of  the  Light-Nature,  to  be  still  in  exist- 
ence, in  order  that  it  (the  Law)  may  be 
put  in  practice.  "  The  Law  is  holy, " 
says  Manes,  "  but  it  is  holy  for  holy  souls, 
the  commandment  is  upright  and  good, 
bnt  for  upright  and  good  souls?''X  He 
says  in  another  passage,^  "If  we  do  good, 
it  is,  not  the  work  of  the  flesh,  for  the 
works  of  the  flesh  are  manifest,  (Gal.  v.  19 ;) 
or  if  we  do  evil,  then  it  is  not  the  work 
of  the  soul,  for  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is 


•  According  to  the  Light-Emanation  System 
adopted  by  Manes,  he  could  not  make  any  diller- 
ence  between  the  Spirit  of  God  and  the  spirit  of 
man,  between  spirit  and  soul. 

\  Augustin.  op.  c.  Julian,  imperfect,  lib.  iii. 
§  187. 

+  L.  c.  c.  Julian,  iii.  186.  §  L.  c.  177. 


INCARNATION  OF    CHRIST — THE  SUN-SPIRIT. 


peace,  joy.  And  the  apostle  exclaims,  | 
in  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  "The good 
Avhich  I  would,  1  do  not,  but  the  evil 
■which  I  would  ifbt,  that  I  do."  Ye  per- } 
ceive,  therefore,  the  voice  of  the  con  tend- 
ing soul,  which  defends  its  i'reedoni  against 
lust,  for  it  was  distressed,  because  Sin, 
that  is,  Satan,  had  worked  all  lust  in  it. 
The  reverence  for  the  Law  discovers  all 
its  evil,  because  the  Law  blames  all  its 
practices,  which  the  flesli  admires  and  es-  ; 
teems ;  for  all  bitterness  in  the  renuncia- 
tion of  lust  is  sweet  for  the  soul,  which 
is  nourished  thereby  and  thereby  attains 
to  strength.  -At  last  the  Soul  of  him  who  I 
withdraws  himself  from  every  gratifica- 
tion of  lust,  is  awake,  it  becomes  mature, ' 
and  increases  ;  but  the  gratification  of  lust 
is  usually  the  means  of  loss  to  tlie  soul.* 
And  now,  in  order  at  last  to  free  the  souls 
which  are  «ikin  to  him  from  the  power  of 
Darkness,  to  animate  them  anew,  to  give 
tliem  a  perfect  victory  over  it,  and  to 
attract  them  to  himself,  the  same  spirit 
of  die  Siin,  who  has  hitherto  conducted 
the  whole  process  of  purification  for 
Nature  and  for  the  spiritual  world  (which 
two,  according  to  the  principles  of  Manes 
here  laid  down,  make  up  only  one 
whole)  must  reveal  himself  in  human 
nature."!" 

But  between  Light  and  Darkness  no 
communion  is  possible.  "  The  Light ' 
shines  in  Darkness, "  said  IVIanes,  using 
the  words  of  St.  John,  after  his  oxi'ti  inter- 
pretation^ "•  but  the  Darkness  cannot  com- 
prehend it."  The  Son  cf  the  Original 
Light,  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun,  could  not 
ally  himself  with  any  material  body  ;  he 
could  only  envelope  himself  in  a  phantomic 
form,  perceptible  by  the  senses,  in  order 
that  he  might  be  perceived  by  man  as  a  \ 
creature  of  sense.  "  While  the  Supreme 
Light,'' ]\Ianes  writes,;];  "put  himself  on 
a  footing  with  his  own  people  as  to  his 
nature,  he  assumed  a  body  among  mate- 
rial bodies,  although  he  himself  is  every 
thing,  and  only  one  whole  nature.  "  By  1 
an  arbitrary  mode  of  interpretation,  he } 
appealed  for  a  proof  of  his  Docetism,  to 
the  circumstance,  that  Christ  once,  (John 

*  On  the  Incarnations  of  the  Sun  in  the  old  ( 
Oricntiil  religions,  see  Kreuzer's  Symbolik,  (New  , 
edition,  2J  Part,  .53, 207.)  It  was  quite  consistent,  ] 
according  to  the  Manicheean  System,  for  the  Mani- 
chees  to  say,  (ap.  Alexander  of  LycopoUs,  c.  24,) 
that  Christ,  as  the  i-juc  was  t^  ovto.  tt^vta.  So  ■ 
also  in  the  Acts  of  Thomas,  p.  10,  xi/^/s,  o  h  Trcitrn 
iiV  K'JJ  Siip^'jUii/ci;  hi-TTxyTOiV  Kit  iyniiuivo;  ttao-i  tuc 
iQU;  <rwx.:u  Slit  rx;  irsLVTuv  hiQUU.;  <p*vi^'.ufxivrj;. 

j  In  the  Letter  to  one  Adas  or  Addas.  FabricU 
Biblioth,  Grseca,  ed.  nov.  vol.  vii.  p.  316. 
40 


313 


viii.  59,)  when  the  Jews  Avished  to  stone 
him,  escaped  through  the  midst  of  them 
Avithout  their  being  able  to  lay  hold  on 
him,  and  also  that  Christ  at  his  transfigura- 
tion appeared  to  his  disciples  in  his  true 
Light-Form*  He  assmned  improperly  the 
name  Christ  or  I\Iessias,  in  accommodat- 
ing himself  to  the  notions  of  the  Jews."]" 
The  Prince  of  Darkness  endeavoured  to 
effect  the  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  because  he 
did  not  know  him  as  the  being  elevated 
above  all  suflering;  and  this  crucifixion 
was,  of  course,  noUiing  but  an  apparent 
one.  This  appearance  represented  the 
crucifixion  of  the  Soul  overwhelmed  with 
matter,  which  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun  desir- 
ed to  elevate  to  himself.  As  the  cruci- 
fixion of  that  soul  which  was  spread  over 
all  matter  only  served  to  facilitate  the  an- 
nihilation of  the  Kingdom  of  Darkness, 
so  also  still  more  did  that  apparent  cruci- 
fixion of  the  Supreme  Soul.  Therefore, 
Manes  said,  "  The  adversary,  who  hopqd 
that  he  had  crucified  the  Saviour,  the 
Father  of  the  righteous,  was  crucified 
himself;  that  which  happened,  and  that 
which  seemed  to  happen  in  this  case, 
were  two  different  things.";j;  The  Mani- 
cheean view,  which  made  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  crucified  merely  symbolical,  is 
clearly  displayed  in  an  apocryphal  writing 
ahout  the  travels  of  the  aposlles.\\  While 
John  is  in  anxiety  during  the  passion  of 
Christ,  the  latter  appears  to  him  and  tells 
him,  that  all  this  happens  only  for  the 
lower  multitude  in  Jerusalen.§  The  hu- 
man person  of  Christ  now  disappears,  and 
instead  of  him  there  appears  a  cross  of 
pure  light,  surrounded  by  various  other 
i'orms,  which,  nevertheless,  represented 
only  one  form  and  one  image,  (as  a  sym- 
bol of  the  various  forms  under  which  the 
one  Soul  appears.)  From  above  the  cross 
there  proceeded  a  divine  and  cheering 
voice,  which  said  to  him,  "The  Cross  of 
Light  will,  for  your  sake,  be  called,  some- 
times the  Logos,  sometimes  Christ,  some- 

•  See  the  Fragment  from  the  Epistles  of  Manes, 
I.e. 

•  f  il  Ttm  XgiiTTou  TTfinyt^Kt  cvouct  iirri  Kxret  Xi"''' 
rtiicY.     1.  c. 

t  From  the  Epistola  Fundamenti,  Euod.  de 
fid.  C.  28.  ThV  iwu-jxti  T«v  Saav  tvng^iirSaw  evs^Tau^ay- 
fla/  T«  Im.  Alex.  Lycopolit.  c.  4.  Christus""  in 
omni  muiido  ct  omni  anima  crucifixus.  Secundin. 
Ep.  ad  Augustin.  The  words  of  Faustus  tho 
Manichce  are  these :  Augustin.  c.  Faustum,  lib. 
xxxii.  Crucis  ejus  myslica  fixio,  qua  nostra; 
anima;  passionis  monstrantur  vulncra. 

II  5T£5<ccf6<  dTTis-TdXai'.  Concil.  Nic.  II.  actio  v.  ed. 
Mansi,  t.  xiii.  p.  167. 

2D 


THE    FINAL   FATE  OF    EVIL. 


314 

times  the  Door,  sometimes  the  Way, 
sometimes  Jesus,  sometimes  the  Father, 
sometimes  tlie  Spirit,  sometimes  Life, 
sometimes  the  Truth,  sometimes  Faith, 
and  sometimes  Grace." 

As  Manes  joined  those  among  the  Par- 
sees  who  maintained  an  absolute  dualism, 
he  did  not  propose  as  the  object  of  the 
whole  course  of  the  world  a  reconcilia- 
tion between  the  good  and  the  evil  prin- 
ciple, which  would  not  have  suited  his 
theory,  but  an  entire  separation  of  Light 
from  Darkness,  and  an  ulter  annihilation  i 
of  the  power  of  the  latter.  After  matter  | 
had  been  deprived  of  all  Light  and  Life,  ' 
which  did  not  belong  to  her,  she  was  to 
be  burnt  up  into  a  dead  mass.*  All  souls  ! 
might  become  partakers  of  redemption  in 
virtue  of  their  Light-Nature ;  but  if  they 
voluntarily  gave  themselves  up  to  the  | 
service  of  evil  or  of  Darkness,  by  way  j 
of  punishment, after  the  general  separation  ! 
of  the  two  kingdoms,  they  were  to  be 
driven  into  the  dead  mass  of  matter,  and 
set  to  keep  watch  over  it.  Manes  in  his 
Epistola  Fundamentl  expressed  himself 
thus  on  this  point:  those  souls  which 
have  allowed  themselves  to  be  seduced 
from  their  original  Light-Nature  through 
love  of.  the  World,  and  have  become 
enemies  of  the  Holy  Light,  that  is,  which 
have  armed  themselves  openly  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Holy  Element,  which 
serve  the  fiery  Spirit,  and  have  oppressed 
by  hostile  persecution  the  Holy  Churchy 
and  the  elect  to  be  found  in  it,;];  that  is, 
the  observers  of  the  commandments  of 
heaven — tiiese  souls  will  be  detained  far 
from  the  blessedness  and  the  glory  of  the 
Holy  Earth.  And  because  they  have 
suffered  themselves  to  be  conquered  by 
evil,  they  will  remain  in  company  with 
this  family  of  evil,  so  that  that  Earth  of 
peace  and  those  regions  of  immortality 
are  closed  against  them.  That  will  hap- 
pen to  them  for  this  reason,  that,  because 
they  gave  themselves  up  to  evil  works, 
they  became  estranged  from  the  Life  and 
Freedom  of  the  Holy  Light.  Thus,  tliey 
cannot  be  received  into  tliat  kingdom  of 
peace,  but  are  chained  down  into  that 
terrible  mass  (of  matter  left  to  itself,  or 
Darkness,)  for  which  a  guard  is  neces- 
sary. These  Souls  will  thus  remain  en- 
tangled among  those  things,  which  they 

•  Tit.  Bostr.  !.  c.  30.     Alex.  Lycopol.  c.  5. 

■J-  That  is,  the  Manichcean  sect. 

I  A  persecution  of  the  Brahmins  of  the  Mani- 
chces,  or  the  Electi,  which  was  a  special  crime; 
all  this  was  in  full  accordance  with  the  oriental 
ideas  of  the  priesthood. 


have  loved,  for  they  did  not  separate 
themselves  from  them,  while  they  had  the 
opportunity.* 

In  regard  to  the  Maiflcheean  view  of 
the  sources  of  knowledge  of  religion,  the 
revelations  of  the  Paraclete  or  Manes^ 
were  the  highest,  the  only  infallible 
sources,  by  which  all  others  must  be 
judged.  They  set  out  from  the  principle 
that  the  doctrines  of  Manes  include  the  ab- 
solute truths,  which  are  evident  to  our  rea- 
son ;  whatever  does  not  accord  with  them, 
is  contrary  to  reason,  and  false,  wherever 
it  may  be  found.  But  they  now  accepted 
also  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
in  part;  but,  while  they  judged  of  them 
according  to  the  paramount  principle 
stated  above,  they  allowed  themselves  a 
very  arbitrary  line  of  criticism  in  respect 
to  their  dogmatical  and  ethical  use.t 
Partly,  they  maintained  that  the  original 
documents  of  religion  had  been  adul- 
terated by  various  interpolations  of  the 
Prince  of  Darkness,;];  (the  tares  amidst  the 
good  wheat;)  partly,  Jesus  and  the  apos- 
tles were  supposed  to  accommodate  them- 
selves to  the  opinions  prevalent  among 
the  Jews,  in  order,  gradually,  to  render 
men  capable  of  receiving  truth  in  its 
purity ;  and  partly,  the  apostles  them- 
selves were  supposed  on  their  first  en- 
trance upon  the  office  of  teachers,  to  have 
been  under  the  influence  of  many  Jewish 
errors.  Thence  they  gathered  that  it  was 
only  by  the  instruction  of  the  Paraclete, 
that  men  could  learn  to  separate  the  true 
from  the  false  in  the  New  Testament. 
Faustus,  the  Manichee,  thus  brings  for- 
ward the  principles  of  Manicheeism  in 
this  respect  :§  ••'  We  only  receive  that 
part  of  the  New  Testament,  which  was 
spoken  to  the  honour  of  the  Son  of  Glory, 
either  by  himself  or  by  the  apostles,  and 
even  then,  only  that  which  was  spoken 
when  they  were  already  perfect  or  be- 
lievers. We  will  take  no  account  of  the 
rest,  neither  what  was  spoken  by  the 
apostles  in  simplicity  and  ignorance, 
while  they  were  as  yet  unacquainted  with 
the  truth,  nor  of  that  which  was  attri- 
buted to  them  with  evil  intentions  by  their 
enemies,  nor  of  that  which  was  impru- 
dently maintained  by  their  writers,||  and 

*   De  Fide.  c.  4, 

-j-  Titus  of  Bostra  says  this  of  them  in  the  very 
heginning  of  his  third  book. 

:t;  See  above,  the  similar  principles  used  in  the 
Clementine  in  regard  to  the  Old  Testament. 

§  Ap.  Augustin,  lib.  32. 

II  Namely  the  Evangelists,  who  were  not 
apostles. 


SOCIETY — AUDITORES — ELECTI. 


315 


handed  down  to  their  successors.  I  think, 
however,  that  HE  was  born  of  a  woman 
in  sin,  was  circumcised  as  a  Jew,  that  he 
sacrificed  as  an  Heathen,  that  he  was  bap- 
tized in  an  inferior  manner,  and  was  car- 
ried about  the  wiUierness  by  the  Devil, 
and  exposed  to  the  most  painful  trials." 
The  same  Manichees  who  were  content 
that  their  reason  should  be  fettered  by  all 
the  decisions  of  Manes  as  divine  revela- 
tions, were  zealous  for  the  rights  of 
reason,  and  wished  to  be  looked  upon  as 
the  only  reasonable  men,  when  they  em- 
ployed themselves  in  separating  what  is 
conformable  to  reason  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament from  that  which  contradicts  it. 
Faustus,  the  Manichee,  speaks  to  one,  who 
believes  without  critical  discrimination 
in  all  which  is  contained  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, "  Tkou.  that  bclievest  all  blindly ; 
ihou^  that  dost  ba7iish  reason,  the  gift  of  na- 
ture, out  of  mankind  ;  thou,  that  makest  it 
a  scruple  to  thyself  to  judge  betioeen  truth 
and  falsehood  !  and  thou.,  that  art  not  less 
afraid  to  separate  good  from  its  contrary, 
than  children  are  afraid  of  ghosts  .'"* 

The  Manichees  had  a  composition  of 
their  religious  society,  entirely  peculiar  to 
themselves,  in  which  the  character  of 
Oriental  Mysticism  may  be  recognised. 
Manes  separated  himself  wholly,  as  it 
follows  from  what  is  said  above,  from  the 
greater  number  of  the  Gnostic  founders 
of  sects,  as  these  latter  wished  to  change 
nothing  in  the  existing  Christian  Church, 
but  only  to  introduce  a  secret  doctrine  of 
the  7r»£V/x«TiKo»  to  run  parallel  with  the 
Church  belief  of  the  ■4/f;i/iKoj.  Manes,  on 
the  contrary,  wished  to  be  looked  upon  as 
a  Reformer  of  the  whole  Church,  sent  from 
God,  and  endued  with  divine  authority ; 
he  wished  to  give  a  new  form  to  the 
Church,  which  he  thought  entirely  dislo- 
cated by  the  intermixture  of  Judaism  and 
Christianity  ;t  there  was  to  be  only  07ic 
true  Christian  Church,  which  was  to  be 
moulded  after  the  doctrines  and  principles 
of  Manes.  In  this,  only  two  orders  were 
to  exist,  according  to  the  distinction  be- 
tween an  exoteric  and  an  esoteric  doctrine, 
which  was  a  fundamental  feature  of  the 
Oriental  systems  of  religion.  The  audi- 
tores  were  to  form  the  great  mass  of  the 
exoterics ;  the  writings  of  Manes  were 
read  to  these,  and  the  doctrines  laid  before 
them  in    their  symbolical  and    mystical 

*   Au^stin.  c.  Faust,  lib.  xviii.  and  also  lib.  xi. 

f  Hence  he  called  other  Christians,  not  Chris- 
tians, but  Galileans.  Fabric.  Bibl.  Gr.  vol.  vii. 
p.  316. 


clothing,  but  they  received  no  explanation 
as  to  their  interior  and  hidden  meaning.* 
We  can  easily  imagine  how  the  expecta- 
tion of  the  auditores  was  put  to  the 
stretch,  when  they  heard  these  enigmatical 
and  mysterious  high-sounding  things  laid 
before  them,  and,  as  it  often  happens, 
hoped  that  they  should  find  lofty  v/isdom 
in  what  was  enigmatical  and  unintelli- 
gible !  The  esoterics  were  the  Elecli,  or 
Perfecti,-\  the  Caste  of  Priests, — the 
Brahmins  of  the  Manichees.l  They  were 
to  lead,  in  celibacy,  a  strictly  ascetic  and 
wholly  contemplative  life ;  tl*ey  were  to 
refrain  from  all  strong  liquors,  and  from 
all  animal  food ;  they  were  to  be  distin- 
guished by  a  holy  innocence,  which  in- 
jures no  living  creature,  and  a  religious 
veneration  for  the  Divine  Life  which  is 
spread  abroad  throughout  all  nature  ;  and, 
hence,  they  were  not  only  neither  to  kill 
nor  wound  any  animal,  but  not  even  to 
pull  any  vegetable,  nor  to  pluck  any  fruit 
or  flower.  They  were  to  be  provided 
with  all  that  was  needful  for  their  subsist- 
ence by  the  auditores,  by  whom  they 
were  to  be  honoured  as  beings  of  a  su- 
perior kind.  From  this  caste  of  priests 
the  leaders  of  the  whole  religious  society 
were  chosen.  As  Manes  wished  to  be 
looked  upon  as  the  Paraclete,  promised 
by  Christ,  he  chose  twelve  apostles  also 
after  the  example  of  Christ,  j^nd  this 
arrangement  was  to  be  constantly  main- 
tained, that  twelve  such  persons,  under 
the  name  of  Magistri,  should  lead  the 
whole  sect.  Above  these  twelve  stood  a 
thirteenth,  who,  as  the  head  of  the  whole 
sect,  represented  Manes.  Under  these 
stood  seventy-two  bishops,  who  were  to 
answer  to  the  seventy  or  seventy-two§ 
disciples  of  Jesus,  and  then  below  these, 
presbyters  and  deacons,  and  lastly,  roving 
missionaries  of  the  faith. || 

There  is  considerable  obscurity  abotit 
the  question,  what  the  Manichees  held  as 
to  the  celebration  of  the  sacraments.  This 
arises  from  the  circumstance,  that  natu- 
rally enough,  no  aulhentic  account  could 
be  known  of  that  which  took  place  in  the 
assemblies  of  the  Electin  which  were  held 


*  It  certainly  follows  from  this,  that  the  writings 
of  Manes  must  contain  a  certain  interior  meaning, 
understood  only  by  the  ekcli. 

f  TtAWi/,  according  to  'J'iieodoret,  an  appellation 
which  re-appeared  again  among  the  Gnostic 
Manicheean  sects  of  the  middle  ages. 

^  Faustus,  as  quoted  by  Augustine,  calls  them 
the  "  Sacerdotale  Genus." 

§  According  to  the  well  known  varia  lectio. 

i  Augustin.  de  Hteres  c.  46. 


MQ 


SACRAMENTS. — BAPTISM. — FESTIVALS. 


very  secretly  ;  and  as  the  auditores  might 
be  supposed  to  answer  to  the  catechu- 
mens, and  the  Electi  to  the  Fldeles  of  the 
general  Church,  it  may  at  once  be  ima- 
gined that  the  sacrament  could  only  be 
celebrated  among  the  Electi.  The  belief, 
that  we  are  justified,  in  consequence  of 
the  inference,  which  has  been  quoted,  as 
made  by  Manes  from  the  prevailing  cus- 
tom of  infant  baptism,  in  supposing  that 
infant  baptism  prevailed  among  the  Mani- 
chees,  is  unsound,  as  Mosheim  has 
already  shown ;  in  that  passage.  Manes 
intended  to*controvert  his  adversaries  out 
of  their  own  conduct  in  respect  to  princi- 
ples, which  that  conduct  necessarily  pre- 
supposed, without  intending  to  convey 
any  approbation  of  that  conduct.  And 
besides,  the  use  of  baptism  might  appear 
to  the  Manichees,  according  to  their  own 
theory  of  the  pure  and  holy  Elements,  as 
a  suitable  ceremony  for  initiation  into  the 
interior  of  the  sect,  or  for  reception  into 
the  number  of  the  electi.  And  yet  it  may 
also  be  thought  that  they  were  not  favour- 
able to  this  symbol,  as  being  a  Jewish 
one,  which  came  from  John  the  Baptist ; 
perhaps,  from  the  very  beginning  no  other 
Ivind  of  initiation  was  practised  among 
them,  than  that  which  we  find  afterwards 
among  the  offsets  of  the  Manichees  in  the 
middle  ages  ;  and  perhaps,  the  use  of  bap- 
tism had  only  proceeded  in  certain  parts  of 
the  sect  from  an  adherence  to  the  prevailing 
custom  of  the  Church.*    The  celebration 


*  From  the  words  of  Felix  the  Manichee,  lib. 
i.  c.  19,  ut  quid  baptizati  sumusl  we  cannot  prove 
that  the  Manichees  considered  baptism  as  a  neces- 
sary initiatory  ceremony,  for  here  also  the  Mani- 
chee is  rather  using  an  argumentum  ad  homi- 
ncm,  and  he  may  have  received  baptism  before  his 
oonversioii  to  Manicheeism.  From  the  passages 
in  the  Commonitorium,  quo  modo  sit  agendum 
cum  Manichffiis  (to  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to 
the  8th.  vol.  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  St  Au- 
gustine,) where  a  distinction  is  made  between 
those  Manichees,  who  had  been  received,  at  their 
conversion  to  the  Catholic  Church  among  the 
Caiechumens,  and  those  who  were  received,  as 
being  already  baptized,  into  the  number  of  the 
Pcenifentes,  it  is  also  entirely  impossible  to  draw 
the  conclusion,  that  baptism  was  in  use  among  the 
Manichees ;  and  still  less  does  it  follow,  because  ! 
such  a  distinction  is  made  between  baptized  and  un- 
baptized  among  the  electi  themselves,  who  trans- 
gressed, that  baptism  was  voluntarily  received  only 
hy  a.  certain  part  0?  the  electi;  for  here  also  the  au- 
thor may  be  speaking  only  of  such  persons  as  had 
received  baptism  in  the  ('atholic  (Jhurch  before 
their  conversion  to  the  Manichecan  sect.  The 
passage  in  Augustin.  de  Moribus  Ecclesiaj  Ca- 
tholiciE,  c.  S.'j,  where  he  makes  the  Manichees 
offer  it  as  a  reproach  to  (Jatholic  Christians,  that 
even  fideles  et  jam  baptizati  lived  in  marriage  and 


of  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord^s  Supper 
might  be  perfectly  well  interpreted  accord- 
ing to  the  mystical  natural  philosophy*  of 
the  Manichees.  Augustine,  as  one  of  the 
auditores  among  the  Manichees,  had 
heard  that  the  electi  celebrated  the  Lord's 
Supper;  but  he  knew  nothing  of  the 
mode  in  which  it  was  done.|  It  is  only 
certain,  that  the  electi  could  drink  no 
wine,  but  whether  they  used  water,  like 
the  Encratites,  the  so-called  i/o'^oTra^aa-ra- 
Tai,  or  what  other  measures  they  took, 
we  have  no  means  of  determining.  The 
sign  of  recognition  among  the  Manichees 
was  the  giving  of  the  right  hand  to  each 
other  when  they  met,  as  a  symbol  of 
their  common  redemption  from  tlie  king- 
dom of  Darkness  through  the  freeing 
power  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Sun ;  while 
that  was  repeated  in  them,  which  had 
taken  place  in  their  Heavenly  Father  the 
Original  Man,  when  he  was  in  danger  of 
sinking  down  into  the  kingdom  of  Dark- 
ness, and  was  again  lifted  up  through  the 
right  hand  of  the  Living  Spirit.;}; 

In  regard  to  i[\e  festivals  of  the  Mani- 
chees^ we  may  observe  that  they  celebrated 
Sunday,  not  as  commemorating  the  re- 
surrection of  Christ,  which  did  not  suit 
their  Docetism,  but  as  the  day  conse- 
crated to  the  Sun,||  who  was  in  fact  their 
Christ.  In  contradiction  to  the  prevailing 
usage  of  the  Church,  they  fasted  on  this 
day.  The  festivals  in  honour  of  Christ, 
of  course,  did  not  suit  the  Docetism  of 
the  Manichees.  While,  indeed,  according 
to  the  account  of  Augustine,  they  some- 
times celebrated  the  festival  of  Easter  in 
accordance  with  the  prevailing  usage  of 
the  Church,  yet  the  lukewarmness  with 
which  this   celebration  took  place,  ma}'' 


in  the  various  relations  of  family  life,  and 
and  administered  earthly  property,  by  no  means 
proves  that  among  the  electi  there  was  a  class  of 
persons,  who,  having  voluntarily  submitted  to 
baptism,  were  the  only  persons  who,  through  an  in- 
violable engagement  were  bound  to  a  strict  ascetic 
life;  for  the  iniELKs  and  the  baptizati,  two 
exactly  equivalent  expressions,  here  have  a  gene- 
ral correspondence  with  the  electi  of  the  Mani- 
chees. Mosheim's  distinction,  therefore,  between 
baptized  and  unbaptized  electi,  however  natural  it 
may  appear  when  abstractedly  considered,  seems 
altogether  arbitrary. 

*  In  accordance  with  the  notion  that  the  fruits 
of  nature  represented  the  Son  of  Man  crucified  in 
nature. 

•j-  Augustin.  contra  Fortunatum,  lib.  i,  in  the 
addendum. 

+  Disputat.  Archelai,  c.  7. 

II  Besides  many  other  passages,  see  Augustin. 
c.  Faiistum,  lib.  xviii.  c.  .5,  "  Vos  in  die,  quern 
dicunt  solis,  solem  colitis." 


PERSECUTION    OF   THE   MANICHEES. 


317 


be  explained  from  the  circumstance  that 
they  could  not  be  touched  by  any  of 
those  feelings,  which  gave  so  much  holi- 
ness to  this  festival  in  the  eyes  of  other 
Christians.  On  this  account  they  cele- 
brated the  more  solemnly  the  martyrdom 
of  their  founder,  Manes,  which  took  place 
in  the  month  of  March.  It  was  called 
Bi7n*a,  (suggestus,  Cathedra,)  the  festival 
of  the  Chair  of  the  Teacher,  the  festival 
dedicated  to  the  memory  of  the  teacher 
illuminated  by  God.  A  teacher's  chair 
gaily  ornamented  and  enveloped  in  costly 
cloths,  was  placed  in  the  room  where 
their  assemblies  were  held,  and  five  steps, 
apparently  as  a  symbol  of  the  five  pure 
Elements,  led  the  way  to  this  chair.  All 
the  Manichees  testified  their  reverence 
for  this  chair,  by  falling  down  before  it 
to  the  earth,  after  the  Oriental  fashion.* 

As  far  as  the  moral  character  of-  the 
Manicheean  sect  is  concerned,  since  it  is 
necessary  on  this  point  accurately  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  different  periods  in 
the  history  of  a  sect,  we  have  too  scanty 
notices  of  the  first  adherents  to  it,  to 
allow  us  to  pronounce  any  definite 
opinion  on  the  point.  Thus  much  only 
may  be  asserted,  that  Manes  intended  to 
maintain  a  severity  of  morals  in  his  doc- 
trine ;  but  it  must  be  acknowledged,  that 
the  mystical  language  in  which  it  was 
conveyed,  which  was  occasionally  in- 
decent, might  introduce  among  unedu- 
cated and  unrefined  men  the  intermixture 
of  a  sensuous  extravagance,  likely  to 
prove  dangerous  to  purity  of  morals. 

Almost  immediately  that  the  Manichees  I 
began  to  spread  in  the  Roman  empire,  a  i 
violent  persecution  broke  out  against  them. 
They  were  peculiarly  obnoxious  to  the 
Roman  government  as  a  sect,  which  drew 
its  origin  from  the  Persian  empire,  then 
at  war  with  the  Roman,  and  which  was 
connected  with  the  religion  of  the  Parsees. 


The  Emperor  Diocletian  (A.  D.  296,)  is- 
sued a  law  (whicli  has  been  quoted,  sec 
p.  84,)  against  tliis  sect,  by  which  the 
leaders  of  it  were  condemned  to  be  burnt, 
and  their  other  associates,  if  they  were 
of  an  ordinary  rank  of  life,  were  to  be 
beheaded  and  suffer  a  forfeiture  of  their 
estates.* 


•  Augustin.  contra  Epist.  Fundamenti,  c.  8,  c. 
Faustum,  lib.  xviii.  c.  5 


•  In  regard  to  the  train  of  tliought  and  the 
language,  in  which  the  edict  is  composed,  it  con- 
tains all  the  internal  marks  of  genuineness.  It  is 
difficult  to  conjecture  by  whom  and  with  what  in- 
tention such  an  edict  could  have  been  invented  in 
this  form.  A  Christian,  who  might  have  been 
inclined  to  palm  such  an  edict  upon  the  world,  in 
order  to  drive  the  emperors  to  a  persecution  of  the 
Manicheean  sect,  would  not  exactly  have  chosen 
Diocletian,  and  still  less  have  attributed  such  lan- 
guage to  him.  Although  the  later  Christians,  in 
their  notions  of  a  dominant  religion,  transmitted 
traditionally  to  them  through  the  Fathers,  had 
much  that  was  analogous  to  the  thoughts  of  the 
Heathen,  yet  a  Christian  would  never  have  ex- 
pressed himself  altogether  in  this  fashion. 

Why  should  not  the  Manicheean  sect  already 
have  been  able  by  that  time  to  extend  itself  to- 
wards Proconsular  Africa;  for  the  Gnostics  had 
been  preparing  the  way  there,  the  Manichees  cer- 
tainly were  at  an  early  period  spread  abroad  in 
these  districts,  and  the  chronological  data  relative 
to  the  first  history  of  this  sect  arc  so  uncertain  ?  It  is 
said  in  the  law,  "  si  qui  sane  etiam  honorati  aut  cu- 
juslibet  dignitatis  vel  majoris  persona}  ad  banc  sec- 
tam  se  transtulerunt,"  but  it  does  not  necessarily 
follow  from  this,  that  the  emperor  had  any  certain 
account  of  the  propagation  of  this  sect  among  the 
first  classes,  and  it  would  not  be  surprising  in  the 
then  attachment  of  persons  of  distinction,  (who  arc 
always  glad  enough,  besides,  to  have  something 
that  implies  distinction  in  religion,)  to  Theurgical 
studies,  and  to  endeavours  after  sublime  determi- 
nation relative  to  the  World  of  Spirits,  if  a  mys- 
terious religion  of  this  kind,  with  such  lofty  pre- 
tensions, found  a  ready  acceptance  with  them. 
Besides  the  argumentum  e  silcntio,  in  historical 
criticism,  is  very  uncertain ;  if  no  particular  cir- 
cumstances conspire  to  give  it  greater  weight,  and 
the  fact  that  the  ancient  Fathers  of  the  Church  did 
not  quote  a  decree  of  Diocletian  against  the  Mani- 
chees, easily  admits  of  a  satisfactory  explanation. 
And  yet  this  decree  is  quoted  as  early  as  Hilarius, 
who  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  epistles  of  St. 
Paul,  fai  the  comment  on  2  Tim.  iii.  7. 
2d2 


THE  AUTHOR'S   PREFACE 


TO  THE  THIRD  PART.* 


I  HERE  publish  the  conclusion  of  the  first  volume  of  my  History  of  the  Church.  I 
must  at  the  same  time  acknowledge  in  some  degree  the  justice  of  the  remark  made  by 
excellent  men,  viz.  that  the  representation  of  the  Apostolic  period  ought  properly  to 
have  preceded  the  whole  of  the  work.  There  were,  however,  many  reasons  which 
were  certainly  more  of  a  subjective  than  an  objective  character,  which  induced  me  still 
to  delay  the  history  of  this  period.  At  the  same  time,  after  I  had  once  followed  this 
plan,  I  found  also,  upon  close  consideration,  that  it  might  prove  convenient  to  attach 
this  representation  [of  the  Apostolic  period]  as  an  appendage  to  the  completion  of  the 
whole ;  and  therefore,  I  have  thought  it  best  to  complete  this  volume,  according  to  the 
plan  on  which  I  had  begun,  and  according  to  the  decision  I  had  previously  announced, 
to  reserve  the  representation  of  the  Apostolic  period  for  a  separate  treatise.f  The  more 
I  believe  myself  to  have  come  to  this  undertaking  by  an  mward  calling  [durch  einen 
innern  Beruf,]  the  more  full  of  importance  the  idea  of  it  appears,  as  it  forms  itself  out 
of  the  whole  of  my  life  and  study,  the  more  I  acknowledge  on  that  account  how  much 
the  realization  falls  below  the  ideal  conception,  by  so  much  the  more  -(velcome  will  it 
be  to  me,  if  other  unprejudiced  friends  of  truth,  who  are  men  of  sound  knowledge,  will 
point  out  to  me  any  deficiencies  in  it  as  a  whole,  or  in  its  several  parts ;  and  certainly, 
as  far  as  I  can  do  it  without  prejudice  to  the  fundamental  views  maintained  throughout 
the' whole  work,  I  shall  use  such  remarks,  in  order  to  bring  the  work  in  a  future  edition 
nearer  to  its  proper  object.  And,  in  this  feeling,  I  must  first  express  at  once  my  most 
hearty  thanks  to  the  excellent  man,  who,  with  an  unprejudiced  love  of  truth,  with  an 
earnestness  of  mind,  and  with  profound  knowledge,  and  in  a  friendly  spirit,  wrote  a 
notice  upon  the  work  in  the  Literatur-Zeitung  of  Halle,  for  March,  1827,  (p.  60 — 62.) 
As  I  do  not  agree  in  my  doctrinal  opinions  with  the  critic,  and  as  he  has  himself 
brought  forward  this  difference  in  our  dogmatical  views,  I  must  on  that  account  the 
more  prize  and  acknowledge  Avith  gratitude  the  calm  love  of  justice,  and  the  kind- 
hearted  moderation  of  the  writer ;  and  I  do  this  the  more  also,  because  it  is  so  rare 
amidst  the  party  passions  of  our  present  theological  and  ecclesiastical  criticism,  to  find 
this  spirit  of  genuine  toleration,  which,  in  the  decision  of  one's  own  opinions,  is  ready 
to  acknowledge  the  rights  of  another,  and  is  mindful  of  the  necessity  ^xSejuv  iv  ayt?r>i. 
And  yet  I  might  find  fault  with  the  author,  for  having  accused  me  of  an  inclination  to 
a  pietistic  character,  if  he  had  used  the  name  pietism  in  as  indistinct  a  manner,  as  is 
usual  among  certain  parties  at  present,  and  as  has  been  the  case  always  in  the  applica- 
tion of  those  names,  by  which  the  predominant  spirit  of  the  times  stamps  the  character 
of  heresy  on  all  which  is  opposed  to  its  own  views.     But  as  the  author  expressly  states 

*  This  part  contains  Section  V. 

+  This  has  since  been  publislied,  and  is  now  announced  as  in  the  course  of  translation  by  Mr. 
Hamilton. 

319 


CCCXX  PREFACE  TO  THE  THIRD  PART. 

what  he  understands  by  it,  and  as  I  really  acknowledge  as  my  dogmatical  persuasion 
what  he  designates  by  this  name,  viz.  "the  view  of  Christianity,  as  healing  the  cor- 
ruption implanted  in  human  nature,  and  as  destined  to  represent  the  Divine  in  the  form 
of  a  servant,  with  which  [view]  the  supra-naturalistic  principle  is  connected,  that  it 
communicates  a  knowledge  [Erkenntniss]  which  lies  beyond  the  range  of  human 
nature."  As,  I  say,  I  acknowledge  this  as  my  belief,  I  can  find  no  fault  with  the 
reviewer,  either  on  the  ground  of  injustice  or  unfairness.  Only  I  might  contend  with 
him  about  the  use  of  the  name  pietism,  according  to  a  just  development  of  its  meaning 
both  etymologically  and  historically ;  but  this  would  not  be  the  proper  place  for  it.  I 
will  make,  besides,  only  the  following  remark,  that  when  we  speak  here  of  a  knowledge 
lying  beyond  the  reason  of  man,  I  mean  thereby  such  a  knowledge  as  is  necessary  for 
the  curing  of  that  corruption  which  lies  in  human  nature,  and  not  the  revelation  of  a 
speculative  dogmatical  system ;  and  yet  my  belief  in  regard  to  this,  [viz,  the  revelation 
of  a  speculative  system,]  may  be  recognised  in  the  third  part,  which  I  now  publish,  as 
far  as  it  can  be  done  in  such  a  historical  representation  as  this.  I  will  only  add  that 
what  the  critic  represents  as  the  object  of  Christianity,  "that  man  should  attain  to  a 
free  moral  change  of  mind,  and  to  a  childlike  reliance  on  a  God  of  love,"  according  to 
my  doctrinal  belief,  is  by  no  means  in  contradiction  to  those  principles,  which  appear 
to  the  critic  to  denote  an  inclination  to  a  pietistic  character  of  mind ;  but  are  far  rather 
founded  upon  it.  Where  certain  differences  in  philosophical  or  dogmatical  views 
exist,  misunderstandings  are  hardly  to  be  avoided,  even  where  there  is  the  most  candid 
love  of  truth  and  the  most  perfect  good  will,  and  I  think,  without  meaning  to  impugn 
in  any  way  the  reviewer's  love  of  truth,  that  still  some  of  these  mistakes  have  crept 
into  this  review,  which  is  a  sound  one,  when  considered  from  the  position  which  its 
author  takes.  When,  for  example,  the  reviewer  opposes  to  my  statement  of  the  heathen 
religions,  the  Hellenic  jta^ov  aaj/aflo)-,  and  thinks,  that,  reversing  my  sentence,  men  might 
deny  to  Christianity  the  idea  of  Beauty  [the  Beautiful,]  Avith  the  same  justice  that  I 
deny  to  Heathenism  the  idea  of  Holiness,  I  must  reply,  that  when  I  say  that  in  the 
religions  of  antiquity  the  idea  of  the  Beautiful,  and  not  the  idea  of  Holiness,  was  the 
animating  principle  (as  every  one  must  acknowledge  who  sees  in  antiquity  the  position 
of  the  development  of  religion  in  an  aesthetical  direction,)  it  by  no  means  follows  that 
the  idea  of  Holiness  was  mltogether  wanting;  which  I  freely  confess  can  never  be  the 
case,  where  the  Qod-consciousness  implanted  in  man  beams  through  the  surrounding 
corruption,  and  therefore,  any  one  might  justly  say,  conversely,  [literally  reversing  the 
proposition,]  that  the  animating  principle  of  Christianity  is  the  idea  of  Holiness,  not 
that  of  the  Beautiful,  from  which  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  idea  of  the  Beautiful 
is  altogether  wanting ;  only  with  this  difference,  that  Christianity  does  not  stand  in 
opposition  to  the  one-sided  heathenism,  as  itself  a  one-sided  modification  of  religious 
materials ;  but  that  it  is  the  highest  element,  which  receives  into  itself  all  inferior 
elements  for  the  fashioning  of  man,  and  is  destined  to  set  forth  the  harmony  in  human 
nature  from  the  highest  position,  so  that  here  also  the  Beautiful,  which  in  heathenism 
appeared  oftentimes  at  variance  with  Holiness,  must  become  ennobled  into  a  form  under 
which  Holiness  is  revealed.  When,  further,  the  critic  accuses  me  of  maintaining  that 
myths  are  sysonymous  with  lies,  I  must  beg  leave  to  observe  that  in  the  passages 
alluded  to  by  the  reviewer,  (i.  p.  6 — 9,)  I  have  represented,  not  my  own  view  of  the 
origin  and  existence  of  the  heathen  religion,  but  the  view  of  the  old  legislators  and 
statesmen,  who  were  accustomed  to  consider  religion  only  in  the  light  of  a  handmaid 
of  the  state.  To  suppose  an  absolute  lie,  which — existing  as  a  lie — could  maintain  a 
dominion  over  the  hearts  of  men  throughout  centuries,  is  truly  something  unintelligible. 
There  exists  as  the  foundation  of  all  religious  phenomena,  somewhat  of  that  revelation 
which  beams  through  and  reveals  the  undeniable  connection  of  the  human  spirit  with 
the  God  in  whom  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being.  But  the  lie  which  exists  at 
first  unconsciously,  or  the  error,  engrafts  itself  upon  the  Original  and  the  Divine. 
Universally  there  is,  in  the  lie,  which  exists  involuntarily,  a  misunderstanding  and  a 


PREFACE  TO  THE  THIRD  PART.  CCCXxi 

falsification  of  what  is  true,  and  I  think  that  I  have  spoken  plainly  on  this  point  in  p.  12, 
and  in  other  passages.  I  am  from  my  very  heart  an  enemy  to  the  harsh  one-sided 
mode  of  considering  history,  so  unsuited  to  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  so  as  to  see  in  all 
that  is  antichristian,  exclusive  of  Judaism,  nothing  but  the  works  of  Satan,  and  so  as 
not  to  trace  throughout  the  whole  history  of  human  nature,  as  through  every  individual 
human  life,  the  progress  onward  from  father  to  son — and  I  hold  this  mode  to  be  as 
unchristian  as  it  is  unintelligible. 

It  would  carry  me  too  far  to  offer  explanations  on  other  points,  and  I  must  reserve  this 
in  individual  cases  for  any  future  new  editions,  where  I  shall  with  pleasure  make  use 
of  all  the  observations  of  this  excellent  man,  whether  they  suggest  corrections,  or  by 
being  opposed  to  my  views,  they  excite  me  to  further  inquiry. 

From  my  heart  I  coincide  Avith  the  declaration  of  the  reviewer  against  those  "  who 
seek  (o  banish  the  life-giving  spirit  by  formula;,  and  to  deaden  the  force  of  faith  by  a 
new-stamped  orthodoxy."  Certainly,  as  the  consideration  of  Christianity,  human 
nature  and  history  teaches  us,  formulas  and  symbolical  books  cannot  bring  into  the 
hearts  of  men  vital  Christianity,  from  which  alone  the  cure  of  man's  nature  can  pro- 
ceed— but  they  far  rather  introduce  in  its  stead  a  dead,  delusive  and  limiting  substitute. 
It  is  only  where  truth  wins  the  heart  and  spirit  of  man  through  her  own  inward  power, 
utterly  unsupported  by  outward  means,  that  the  power  of  faith,  and  the  true  right  faith, 
can  be  estabhshed.  As  far  as  regards  the  anxiety  expressed  by  the  reviewer,  (for  which 
I  heartily  thank  him,)  lest  I  should  be  determined  by  outAvard  circumstances  to  spare 
space  to  the  injury  of  the  work,  the  excellent  arrangements  made  by  our  esteemed 
friend,  the  publisher,  have  put  me  in  a  condition  to  meet  the  wishes  expressed,  and  at 
the  same  time  a  cheaper  edition,  with  smaller  type,  will  lighten  the  expense  of  the 
work  to  those  who  are  in  indifferent  circumstances. 

As  far  as  the  judgment  of  those  is  concerned,  who  recognise  nothing  which  does  not 
coma  under  a  certain  definite  form,  adapted  to  their  own  particular  school,  and  who 
arrange  d  priori  first  a  dogmatical  system,  and  then  an  interpretation  and  a  history, 
after  the  formulae  of  certain  schools,  which  must  suit  every  thing,  and  Avhich  can  only 
impede  freedom  of  thought,  studies  and  life ;  I  can  do  nothing  but  despise  the  judg- 
ments that  proceed  from  such  a  quarter,  whether  expressed  or  implied  in  silence ; — and, 
indeed,  all  this  arrogant  and  pretended  knowledge  of  certain  parties  of  our  times  is  my 
detestation.  I  willingly  stand  on  the  position  of  a  general  history ;  and  may  God 
preserve  me  from  such  a  plan  as  can  be  deduced  from  a  few  miserable  formuhr,  without 
study  and  without  life !  a  true  pest  both  for  the  spirit  and  the  heart !  It  would  be  well 
if  we  would  learn  from  general  history,  that  there  is  nothing  new  under  the  sun.  and 
if  we  would  hear  how  John  of  Salisbury  characterizes  this  disposition  in  the  twelfth 
century : 

"  Itaque  recentes  magistri  e  scholis  et  pulli  volucrum  e  nidis  sicut  pari  tempore 
morabantur,  sic  pariter  avolabant.  Sed  quid  docebant  novi  doctoces  etqui  plus  somni- 
orum  quam  vigiliarum  in  scrutinio  philosophic  consumpserant?  Numquid  rude  aliquid 
aut  incultum,  numquid  aliquid  vetustum  aut  obsoletum?  Ecce  nova  fiehant  omnia, 
innovabatur  grammatica,  immutabatur  dialectica,  contemnebatur  rhetorica,  et  novas 
totius  quadrivii  vias,  evacuatis  priorum  regulis,  de  ipsis  philosophia;  adytis  proferebant. 
Solam  rationem  loquebantur,  argumentum  sonabat  in  ore  omnium  et  asinum  nominare 
vel  hominem  aut  aliquid  operum  naturae  aut  ineptum  nimis  aut  rude,  et  a  philosopho 
alineum." 

Let  this  work,  therefore,  be  dedicated  to  all  those  Avho,  with  an  humble  heart,  and  in 
freedom  from  the  service  of  man,  seek  the  truth  which  is  with  God  alone,  and  comes 
from  God. 

Deo  soli  gloria,  omnia  hominum  idola  pereant ! 

A.  Neander. 
Berlin,  1827. 

41 


323 


SECTION  Y. 


THE  HISTORY   OF  THE   FORMATION   AND   DEVELOPjMENT    OF   CHRISTIAINITy   AS 

A  SYSTEM  OF  DOCTRl\ES  IN  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH,  WHICH  FORMED 

ITSELF  IN  OPPOSITION  TO  THE  SECTS. 

(1)   The  genetic  development  of  Church  Theolos^y  in  general,  and  the  characteristic  of  tlve 
individual  religions  and  dognwtical  dispositions  which  have  peculiarly  injluenced  it. 


Life  in  religion,  as  elsewhere,  precedes 
understaiitling,  and  this  latter  forms  itself 
out  of  the  iornier.  Christianity  had  at 
first  taken  root  in  the  inward  life,  and 
had  liere  become  the  ruling  principle ; 
but  then  the  full  import  of  tlie  doctrines 
of  that  faith,  into  which  man  had  been  at 
first  led  through  a  new  life  within,  and  the 
power  of  which  he  had  first  experienced 
in  his  spiritual  life,  was  necessarily  to  be 
brought  out  into  a  full  and  clear  con- 
sciousness, by  means  of  a  form  of  thought 
corresponding  to  this  inward  life,  and  ex- 
press^ed  in  definite  ideas,  with  constantly 
increasing  clearness  and  distinctness.  As 
we  have  before  observed,  this  end  was 
peculiarly  furthered  by  the  struggle  against 
those  tendencies  of  the  religious  spirit, 
which,  although  they  were  in  some  de- 
gree touched  by  the  influence  of  Chris- 
tianity, yet  constantly  adulterated  real 
Christianity  on  one  side  or  the  other ; 
and  which,  therefore,  by  means  of  their 
opposition,  still  more  called  forth  the  en- 
deavour to  set  this  (i.  e.  pure  Christianity,) 
in  a  clear  light,  and  to  hold  it  steady. 

The  opposition  against  Judaism  and 
rieatlienism,  from  the  very  nature  of 
things,  could  influence  only  the  most 
general  development  of  Christian  know- 
ledge ;  but  the  opposition  against  those 
Judaizing,  Orientalizing,  and  Ilellenizing 
tendencies,  which  laid  hold  even  of  the 
inward  life  of  tlie  Church,  and  threatened 
to  corrupt  it,  had  this  efi'ect,  that  tlie  im- 
port of  the  peculiarly  Christian  doctrines 
was  unfolded  and  brought  befcire  the 
mind  of  man  with  more  clear  and  distinct 
consciousness.  But  yet,  as  Christianity 
was  constantly  limiting  its  propagation 
more  and  more  to  the  territory  of  hea- 
thenism, and  passing  out  nf  the  circle  of 
Judaism,  the  connection  of  the  Catliolic 
Church,  as  it  formed  itself  Avith  Judaism, 
must  liave  become  less  and  less,  while  its 
connection  with  Gnosticism,  the  more 
Christianity  was  spread  among  the  edu- 
cated heathens,  to  whose  views  the  more 


j  free  Gnostic  conception  of  it  would  be 
'  most  consonant,  would  become  constantly 
':  more  predominant,  and  of  itself,  the  influ- 
i  ence  of  the  deep  and  comprehensive 
j  Gnosticism,  would  be  more  important, 
I  more  prolific,  and  more  lasting,  than 
;  that  of  the  meagre  and  dry  Judaism.  No 
I  phenomenon  of  this  age  had  so  general 
!  an  influence  on  the  development  of  the 
j  Christian  Faith  and  Theology,  as  Gnos- 
I  ticism  had,  by  means  of  the  opposition 
which  it  excited. 

As  far  as  regards  this  influence  in 
general,  without  reference,  however,  to 
the  most  important  doctrines,  (of  which 
we  shall  hereafter  speak  more  at  large,) 
men  were  necessarily  induced,  through 
their  opposition  to  the  Gnostics,  to  give 
an  account  to  themselves  of  the  sources 
from  which  a  knowledge  of  the  Christian 
faith  was  to  be  obtained,  for  tlie  Gnostics 
denied  the  authenticity,  or  at  least  the 
sulhciency  of  the  documents,  M-hich  alone 
liad  hitlierto  been  silently  received  in  the 
Catholic  Church,  namely,  the  received 
body  of  Scripture,  as  well  as  of  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Church,  and  in  opposition  to 
these  they  set  up  a  different  source  of 
knowledge  in  a  pretended  secret  doctrine, 
transmitted  down  from  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  or  from  a  chosen  number  among 
the  apostles.  And  since,  besides,  the 
Gnostics,  by  means  of  a  capricious  and 
allegorizing  mode  of  interpretation,  or  by 
a  literal  one,  which  was  just  as  capricious, 
and  which  did  not  regard  the  context  in 
ascertaining  the  sense  of  words,  and 
which  set  at  nought  all  laws  of  thought 
and  speech,  made  it  easy  for  themselves 
by  these  means  to  introduce  all  their  un- 
biblical  meanings  into  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, and  to  deceive  the  unwary  who 
iieani  tfiem  adduce  so  many  passages  of 
Holy  Writ;  so  their  adversaries  were 
j  obliged  to  oppose  this  capricious  mode 
of  interpretation,  by  establishing  the  ob- 
1  jective  grounds  of  a  logical  and  gramnia- 
1  tical  interpretation,  and  thus  the  first  seeds 


324 


POSSIBILITV    OF   UNION. 


of  a  biblical  hermeneutic  proceeded  from 
these  controversies.  When  the  Gnostics 
transferred  to  the  Christian  religion  that 
contrast  between  a  religion  of  the  people 
and  a  religion  of  the  initiated,*  wliich  had 
been  removed  by  Christianity,  and  which 
was  contrary  to  its  very  nature,  the  oppo- 
sition to  this  error  was  the  first  cause 
that  an  essential  religious  faitli,  independ- 
ent of  philosophy,  and  not  interwoven 
into  any  mythology,  but  clear  in  itself 
and  self-sufficient,  was  brought  before  the 
light  as  the  foundation  of  a  higher  life  for 
all  mankind,  and  more  distincdy  defined. 
While  the  Gnostics  were  here  applying 
the  position  of  tlie  earlier  religions  to 
Christianity,  their  opponents  were  obliged 
on  that  very  account  to  bnng  the  peculiar 
religious  position  of  the  latter  more 
clearly  before  their  own  minds. 

And  yet,  while  on  the  one  side  an  op- 
position to  Gnosticism  would  naturally 
arise  here,  yet  on  the  other,  this  struggle, 
which  Vv'as  right  in  itself,  and  quite  in 
union  with  tlie  spirit  of  Christianity, 
would  present  a  point  on  which  Gnosis 
might  engraft  itself  This  was  a  struggle 
after  a  deeper  knowledge  of  the  inward 
connection  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Chris- 
tian faith,  a  struggle  to  proceed  forth 
from  the  position  which  Christianity 
takes  up  and  thence  attain  to  a  mode  of 
viewing  liuman  and  divine  things,  which 
should  form  one  systematic  whole. — 
Gnosis  of  itself  was  not  necessarily  false, 
but  that  false  pride  of  Gnosis  was  so, 
which,  instead  of  going  forth  from  the 
foundation  of  faith,  and  unfolding  thus 
the  import  and  the  connection  of  that 
Aviiich  had  been  acquired  in  a  lively 
manner  through  faith,  thought  to  be  able 
to  raise  itself  above  a  life  in  faith  ;  and 
considering  this  life  in  faith  as  valid  only 
for  a  subordinate  position,  tliought  that  it 
could  bestow  something  of  a  higher  kind. 
Abrupt  contradiction  can  never  persuade 
the  erring,  and  never  efiectually  stem  the 
progress  of  any  false  views  which  happen 
to  exist  in  any  particular  age.  Abrupt 
contradiction,  which  condemns  the  true 
together  with  the  false,  is  more  likely  to 
provoke  more  fiercely  an  erroneous  oppo- 
sition party  which  is  conscioiis  of  having 
some  grounds  founded  in  truth ;  and 
therefore,  such  a  contradiction  furthers  the 
propagation  of  these  errors,  inasmuch  as 
it  lends  them  an  appearance  of  justice,  aiul 
a  point  on  wliich  to  attach  themselves  in 
the  real  wants  of  human  nature  :  and  this 


[  Literally,  "  the  perfect."   H.  J.  R.] 


was  also   shown  then  in  the  prnna^ation 

of  the  Gnostic  sects.     'I'he  best  means  of 

successfully  combating  errors,  which  arise 

from  a  fundamental  disposition  of  human 

nature  which   has  only  been  led  astray, 

I  is    always  to  recognise  this    disposition 

j  with    its  just  rights,  and    to    satisfy    its 

demands  in  the  mode  that  nature  dictates. 

j  This  would  have   happened  in  regard  to 

I  the   Gnostics,  if  men,   while  they  main- 

1  tained  the  dignity  and  the  independence 

!  of  faith,  had  yet  aduiowledged  tlie  just 

'  and  right  feeling  on  which  that  struggle 

after  a  Gnosis  was  founded,  and  if  they 

had    endeavoured    to    set   forth    such   a 

Gnosis  as  proceeded  from  faith,  and  was 

only  the  natural   production  of  faith   in 

I  human  reason  enlightened  by  that  faith. 

I  Thus  the  germ  of  a  Christian  Dogmatic 

(system  of  doctrines)  systematically  hang- 

I  ing  together,  and  of  a  Christian  philoso- 

,  phy,  would  be  formed ;  and  these  two, 

like  many  other  dissimilar  elements  of 

the   new  spiritual  world  of  Christianity, 

I  which  was  first  conceived  in  its  chaotic 

!  stage  of  development,  might  by  and  by 

be  separated  from  each  other. 

The  establishment  of  a  faith  indepen- 
dent of  speculation,  of  the  practical  nature 
and  the  practical  tendency  of  Christianity, 
on  one  liand,  and  on  the  other,  the  deve- 
lopment of  a  Gnosis  built  on  the  founda- 
tion of  faith,  these  were  the  two  corner- 
stones from  which  the  formation  of  the 
Churchly  theology  proceeded,  and  here 
its  two  proper  chief  divisions  may  be 
recognised.  Here  also  the  progress  of 
the  development  of  human  nature  brought 
this  consequence  wiUi  it,  that  these  two 
dispositions  did  not  immediately  work, 
together  harmoniously,  and  did  not  im- 
mediately fall  into  the  just  and  natural 
relations  whicli  ought  to  exist  between 
them,  but  that  by  mutual  departure  from 
die  just  harmonious  mean,  and  by  a  partial 
love  of  dominion  in  both  of  tlieni,  those 
two  tendencies  of  die  Christian  spirit,  the 
one,  a  predominantly  realistic,  the  other, 
a  predominanUy  idealistic  turn,  fell  into 
collision  with  each  other;  as  well  in  the 
development  of  the  Church  doctrine,  as 
in  opposition  to  it;  only  with  this  differ- 
ence, that  here  both  dispositions  set  out 
from  the  selfsame  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  were  united  together  by  the 
one  spirit. of  that  Christianity.  Tiius  was 
Christianity  to  prepare  the  way  for  its 
own  development  in  the  midst  of^  the  con- 
tradictions of  human  nature,  which  find 
in  it  their  reconciliation. 

The  first  of  these  was  originally  the 


PRACTICAL    CHRISTIAN    DISPOSITION'. 


prevailing  tendency  in  the  development 
ot'  Cliiirclily  theology,  for  this  theology 
originally  formed  itself  from  a  realistic 
and  practically  Christian  spirit,  the  desire 
of  defending  the  unchangeable  ground- 
work of  the  Christian  faith  against  the 
caprice  of  Gnostic  speculation.  We  find 
this  disposition  among  the  lirst  J'alhers 
of  Asia  Minor,  in  Polycarp  of  Smyrna, 
Papias  of  Hierapolis  in  Phrygia,  Melito 
of  Sardis,  and  in  Irenajus,  who  was 
formed  in  the  school  of  Asia  Minor,  and 
having  transferred  the  sphere  of  his  acti- 
vity to  Lyons  and  the  western  Church  in 
tlie  latter  half  of  his  life,  transplanted 
that  disposition  thither  also.  These 
Fathers  of  Asia  Minor  acted  as  pastors 
of  these  Churches,  in  which  they  endea- 
voured to  maintain  the  pure  and  simple 
apostolic  doctrine,  and  to  defend  it  against 
corruption.  They  Avere,  hence,  compelled 
to  enter  into  controversy  with  the  Gnostic 
sects  which  were  spreading  around  them 
in  Asia  3Iinor.  A  truly  Christian  con- 
sciousness animated  them  in  their  struggle 
against  the  idealism  of  Gnosticism ;  but 
yet  they  often  opposed  to  it  only  a  grossly 
sensuous,  anthropomorphic,  anthropopa- 
thical  apprehension  of  spiritual  matters, 
v/hich  arose  from  a  deficient  and  ignorant 
cast  of  mind,  not  sufficiently  penetrated 
and  illuminated  by  the  Spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity. Although  there  were  among  them 
men  of  a  variety  of  isolated  literary 
acquirements,  yet  they  were  deficient  in 
tlie  essentials  of  a  learned  and  systematic 
training  of  the  mind.  We  further  find 
this  disposition  in  the  Western  or  Romish 
Cliurch,  under  which  we  reckon  all  those 
countries  in  which  the  Latin  language 
prevailed.  Although  the  peculiar  cha- 
racter of  the  Romish  people  received  a 
difierent  modification  under  the  influence 
of  difierent  climates,  and  according  to  the 
nature  of  the  original  inhabitants  on 
which  it  was  engrafted,*  as,  for  instance, 
among  the  Carthaginian  people  in  the  hot 
part  of  Africa;  yet  we  may  look  upon 
ihe  peculiar  character  of  the  Romans  as 
the  generally  prevailing  character  here, 
and  in  the  infiuence  it  had  upon  the  con- 
ception of  Christian  doctrine,  we  cannot 
but  recognise  the  prevailing  realism  of 
the  less  variable  Romish  spirit,  which 
stifiy  holds  fast  what  it  has  once  received. 
VVe  may  consider  Irenajus  as  a  repre- 


325 


I  sentative  of  that  first  practical  Christian 
disposition  which  opposed  itself  toGnos- 
I  ticism.  He  is  distinguished  as  a  partaker 
'  in  all  the  ecclesiastical  events  of  his  days, 
and,  as  a  dogmatic  writer,  by  his  sobriety 
and  his  moderation  in  holding  fast  the 
\  essential  foundations  of  the  Christian 
I  faith,  as  well  as  by  maintaining  what  is 
'  practically  important  in  his  treatment  of 
all  individual  Christian  doctrines.  In  his 
I  chief  work  against  the  Gnostics,  he  says 
I  of  the  one  unchangeable  essential  funda- 
j  mental  doctrine  of  Christianity,  to  which 
'  the  agreement  of  all  Churches  gives  wit- 
1  ness,  and  which  every  luiprejudiced  per- 
I  son  could  himself  adduce  from  Scripture,* 
I "  Although  scattered  over  the  whole 
world,  the  Church  as  carefully  maintains 
j  this  faith  as  if  it  inhabited  only  one 
house.  It  believes  these  things  as  if  it 
had  one  soul  and  the  same  heart,  and  it 
preaches!  them  as  harmoniously  as  if  it 

liad  only  one  mouth As  the  Sun, 

the  creature  of  God,  is  one  and  the  same 
over  all  the  world,  so  also  the  preaching 
of  the  truth  shines  every  where,  and  illu- 
minates all  men  who  are  willing  to  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  He 
among  the  presidents  of  the  Churches, 
who  is  mighty  in  eloquence,  can  preach 
nothing  else  but  this  (for  no  one  is  above 
the  teacher-,)  nor  does  he  that  is  weak 
in  preaching  diminish  the  doctrine  de- 
livered to  him ;  for  as  the  faith  is  one 
and  the  same,  he  who  is  able  to  speak 
much  concerning  it,  can  add  nothing  to 
it,  and  he  who  is  able  to  say  but  litde, 
cannot  diminish  it."J  He  thus  opposes 
the  speculative  sopiiistry  of  this  prin- 
ciple :§  "  Sound, II  unsuspecting,  pious 
reason,  that  loves  the  truth,  will  with  joy 
meditate  on  what  God  has  given  into  the 
power  of  man,  and  subjected  to  our 
knowledge,  and  he  will  advance  in  it, 
rendering  the  learning  of  it  easy  to  him- 
self by  daily  exercise.  Now  this  consists 
of  those  things  that  fall  under  our  own 
eyes,  and  those  things  that  are  expressly 


*  Although  we  must  take  far  less  account  of 
these  circumstances  in  the  case  of  Christian 
Churches  in  large  towns,  because  in  them  fewer 
traces  of  the  old  inhabitants  remained. 


*  liib.  i.  3.  [I.  c.  X.  §  2,  Ed.  Massuet.  p.  49. 
The  ])revious  section,  which  contains  this  universal 
creed,  is  one  of  very  great  value,  as  it  sets  forth 
one  of  the  most  ancient  confessions  of  faith  in 
language  very  closely  resembling  the  Apostles' 
Creed.— H.  .T.  K.] 

f  ["  It  preaches,  it  teaches,  and  it  hands  down," 
is  the  exact  translation  of  the  Greek  phrase. — II. 
J.  R.] 

t  [This  is  evidently  an  allusion  to  the  manna, 
Exod.  xvi.  18.     See  Massuet's  note. — H.  J.  K.] 

§  Lib.  ii.  c.  45.  [c.  xxvii.  Ed.  .Massuet.] 

II   I'mvJuvj;,  sicher  ihres  Wogcs  gehcndc] 

2E        . 


326 


IREN^US. — MONTANISM, 


said  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  openly  and 
unambiguously."  ''•  It  is  better  and  more 
advantageous,"  says  the  same  writer,*"  to 
be  ignorant  and  to  come  near  to  God  by 
love,  than  for  a  man,  who  seems  to  be  a 
man  of  great  learning  and  knowledge,  to 
be  found  blaspheming  against  his  own 
Master.  Therefore  did  Paul  exclaim, 
'  knowledge  pufleth  up,  but  charity  edi- 
fieth.'  Not  as  if  he  had  blamed  the  real 
knowledge  tbat  comes  from  God,  for  then 
he  would  have  accused  Jiimself  the  first; 
but  because  he  knew  that  many,  elated  by 
the  pretence  of  knowledge,  departed  from 
the  love  of  God It  is  better,  there- 
fore, that  a  man  should  know  nothing, 
should  not  know  the  cause  of  any  one  of 
created  things,  why  it  was  created,  but 
believe  in  God  and  persevere  in  love  of 
him,  thaaj  that  being  puffed  up  by  this 
kind  of  knowledge,  he  should  fall  away 
from  the  love  that  makes  man  living;  it  is 
better  to  wish  to  know  nothing  else  than 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  who  was 
crucified  for  us,  thanj  to  fall  into  impiety 
by  subtile  questions  and  petty  cavilings 
at  words."  "  It  is  no  wonder,"  says  Ire- 
na3us,§  "  if  we  find  many  difiiculties  which 
we  cannot  remove,  in  spiritual  and  hea- 
venly things,  in  those  whicli  are  known 
to  us  only  by  revelation,  wlien  in  that 
which  lies  before  our  feet,  I  mean  in  tliat 
which  we  perceive  by  the  senses,  much 
escapes  our  knowledge,  and  these  things 
we  leave  to  God,  who  mnst  be  elevated 
above  every  thing.  But  if  in  the  things 
of  the  creation,  something  is  within  the 
reach  of  our  knowledge,  and  other  things 
are  reserved  for  the  knowledge  of  God, 
how  can  we  think  it  a  difficulty,  that  out 
of  those  things  that  are  sought  in  the 
Holy  Scripture,  the  whole  of  which  is 
spiritual,  we  should  be  able  to  unravel 
some  by  the  grace  of  God,  while  others 
are  still  reserved  to  the  knowledge  of 
God,  and  that  too,  not  only  in  the  present 
world,  but  in  that  which  is  to  come ;  in 
order  that  God  may  always  teach,  and 
man  may  always  learn  from  God." 
"They  complain,"  says  Iren;cus  of  the 
Gnostics,  "  of  the  ignorance  of  ihe  holy 
presbyters,|i  because  they  do  not  consider 


'   Lib.  ii.  c.  4,'i.     [c.  26,  Ed.  Mas.suct,  p.  1.54.] 
f  This  part  has  unfortunately  only  come  down 

to  us  in  a  Latin  triinslation,  where  the  translator 

has  evidently  rendered  «  by  aut  instead  of  quam. 

Neander  has  very  j)ropcrly  translated  it  as  if  it 

were  quam. — H.  J.  K.] 
i  See  last  note. 

§  Lib.  ii.  c.  47.    [c.  28,  Ed.  Massuet,  p.  1.56.] 
1  Irenaeus  uses  tiie  word  "holy"  here  in  the 


of  how  much  greater  value  a  pious  com- 
mon man  is,  t!ian  a  blaspheming  and  im- 
pudent sophist."* 

!  We  may  consider  Montaaism  as  one  of 
I  the  forms  of  error  which  this  anti-Gnos- 
,  tic  religious  realism  assumed,  because, 
j  where  it  was  carried  to  the  extreme,  it 
j  opposed  the  predominance  of  extravagant 
speculation,  by  the  predominance  of  extra- 
vagant feelings.  It  was  a  system,  which, 
while  it  professed  to  have  a  source  of  illu- 
mination besides  the  Holy  Scripture,  and 
j  the  reason,  as  'enlightened  by  those  Scrip- 
I  tures,  became,  in  a  different  way,  a  prey  to 
I  the  self-deceptions  of  a  caprice  whicli 
I  confused  what  belongs  to  man  with  what 
belongs  to  God. 

[  With  regard  to  Montanus  himself,  from 
whom  it  arose,  we  have,  alas,  too  slender 
documents  to  allow  us  satisfactorily  to 
explain  psychologically  the  course  of  his 
religious  development,  and  the  origin  of 
his  peculiar  religious  opinions.  But  the 
personal  history  of  this  man  cannot  be 
here  of  the  same  importance,  as  the 
scandal  which  he  brought  upon  a  habit 
of  mind  then  prevalent,  in  consequence 
of  the  effects  which  it  produced.  The 
idea  proclaimed  by  Montanus  was  no 
new  idea ;  it  was  one,  which  had  in  many 
persons  arisen  from  a  one-sided  turn  of 
mind  in  regard  to  Christianity,  and  had 
become  to  them  the  centre  point  of  their 
inward  life,  without  their  being  aAvare  of 
it.  It  was  only  by  means  of  Montanus 
that  this  idea  became  the  centre  of  a 
compact  and  separate  set  of  opinions, 
I  and  the  point  of  union  for  a  Church 
party  which  formed  itself  upon  that  set 
I  of  opinions.  What  had  probably  been 
j  brought  forward  by  Montanus  only  in  a 
fragmentary  manner  in  the  language  of 
feeling,  was  conceived  by  the  spirit  of  a 
Tertullian  with  a  more  clear  conscious- 
ness, and  was  worked  up  into  a  systematic 
whole.  We  must,  therefore,  in  order  to 
characterize  the  opinions  of  Montanus, 
use  also  the  writings  of  Tertullian, 
although  we  should  not  be  justified  in  at- 
tributing to  the  less  formed  and  cultivated 
mind  of  Montanus  all  the  thougliis  ex- 
pressed by  one  like  Tertullian,  whose 
more  advanced  development  of  mind 
renders  his  views  more  definite  and  of 
more  importance. 

sense  in  which  the  New  Testament  applies  it  to 
all  true  Christians, 

*  Lib.  V.  c.  20.  [Neander  has  translated 
"  Idiota"  by  Idiot,  which  may  answer  in  (unman, 
but  would  lead  to  a  wrong  notion  in  English. — H. 
J.  K.] 


CHARACTER    OF    MONTANIS.M. 


527 


The  one  side  of  Christianity,  the  idea  ' 
of  a  communication  of  a  Divine  life  to  { 
liuman  nature  as  a  means  of  reforming  it ;  1 
the  idea  of  a  new  Divine  creation,  which  ^ 
shouUl  reform  every  tiling,  and  of  an  over-  \ 
powering  dominion  of  the  Divinity  in  | 
man's  nature ;  this  idea,  which  forms  a 
keynote  to  Christianity,  was  predomi-  ] 
nant  in  Montanism,  and  made  its  centre 
point ;  but  the  other  side  of  Christianity, 
the  idea  of  the  harmonious  amalgamation 
of  the  Divine  and  the  human*  in  man's 
nature  when  renewed  by  tlic  Divine  prin- 
ciple of  life,  tlie  idea  of  the  free  and  in- ' 
dependent  development  of  the  ennobled 
faculties  of  man's  nature  as  a  necessary  \ 
consequence  of  this  amalgamation,  this  \ 
idea  and  the  other  keynote  of  Chris- ' 
tianity  which  flows  from  it,  were  thrown 
into  the  back  ground.  In  this  system 
(.Montanism)  the  influence  of  the  Divine 
power  appears  as  a  magical  i)ower,  taking 
an  irresistible  hold  on  man,  and  over- 
whelming all  his  human  qualities;  while 
that  which  is  human  appears  to  be  only 
a  blind  instrument  involuntarily  borne  on. 
Montanism,  when  carried  to  the  extreme, 
would  necessarily  lead  men  to  set  Chris- 
tianity in  hostile  array  against  all  know- 
ledge and  art,  as  if  either  were  an  adul- 
teration of  that  which  is  Divine  by  man's 
intermingling  his  own  activity  with  it. 

Montanus  was  a  new  convert  in  a  vil- 
lage of  Mysia,  called  Ardaban  (Ardabau)  t 
on  the  confines  of  Phrygia.  What  hap-  | 
pens  to  individual  men,  happened  here , 
with  provinces  in  a  body,  that  their  way  • 
of  conceiving  Christianity  bears  the  stamp  | 
of  their  previous  national  peculiarities,  just 
as  with  individual  peculiarities,  whether ' 
it  be  that  these  subordinate  themselves  | 
to  the  spirit  of  Christianity  and  rise  up  [ 
again  in  it  in  an  ennobled  form,  or! 
whether  they  mingle  themselves  in  a  dis- 
turbing manner  with  the  energies  of 
Christianity,  and  that  the  former  iniqui- 
ties break  out  again,  only  covered  with  a 
Christian  garb.  Of  the  latter  process 
many  traces  are  to  be  found  in  regard  to 
the  Phrygian  national  peculiarities.  In  | 
the  old  national  religion  of  the  Phrygians 
we  recognise  the  character  of  this  moun- 
tain people,  inclined  to  fanaticism  and  su- 
perstition, and  easily  induced  to  believe 
in  magic  and  enchantment,  nor  can  we 
wonder  if  in  the  ecstasies  and  somnam-  j 
bulism  of  the  3Iontanists  we  find  again  the 
Phrygian  spirit,  which  showed  itself  in 

*  [Durchdringung.     Literally  penetration — in- 
terpenetration. — H,  J.  R.j 


the  ecstasies  of  the  priests  of  Cybele  and 
Bacchus. 

As  many  in  the  first  ardent  zeal  of  con- 
version gave  up  all  their  earthly  goods, 
and  devoted  themselves  to  a  strict  ascetic 
life,  such  an  ascetic  zeal  also  seized 
Montanus  as  a  new  convert.  We  must 
remember,  that  he  was  living  in  a  coun- 
try, where  there  was  a  widely  extended 
expectation,  that  the  Church,  on  the  scene 
of  its  sufferings,  and  on  earth  itself  before 
the  end  of  all  earthly  things,  would  enjoy 
a  thousand  years  of  triumphant  empire — 
the  expectation  of  a  final  reign  of  Christ 
upon  the  earth  for  a  diousand  years 
(chiliasm  as  it  was  called) — and  where 
many  images  of  an  enthusiastic  imagina- 
tion about  the  nature  of  this  expected 
kingdom,  were  then  current.*  The  time 
at  which  he  lived — either  during  those 
calamitous  natural  events  of  which  we 
have  spoken  above,  (see  p.  60,)  and  the 
persecutions  of  the  Christians  which  fol- 
lowed upon  them,  or  during  the  bloody 
persecutions  of  Marcus  Aurelius,"f  was  al- 
together calculated  peculiarly  to  promote 
such  an  excitement  of  feeling,  and  such  a 
turn  of  the  imagination.  There  was  just 
at  that  season  a  violent  contest  in  Asia 
Minor,  between  the  speculative  Gnostics, 


*  Papias  of  Hierapolis,  having  lived  in  Phrygia, 
had  already  heen  active  there,  and  many  passages 
of  the  Pseudo-Sibylline  point  to  Phrygia  also. 
There  are  certainly  no  grounds  for  .supposing, 
with  Longuerue  and  Blondel,  that  these  passages 
came  from  Montanus  or  the  Montanists,  for  there 
are  no  ideas  whatever  peculiar  to  Montanism  in 
those  Pseudo-Sibylline  oracles.  We  should  rather 
here  recognise  that  selfsame  peculiar  Phrygian 
spirit,  which  is  also  reflected  in  Montanism.  If 
Mount  Ararat  be  supposed  transplanted  to  Phry- 
gia, wc  should  recognise  here  the  same  prejudice 
among  the  Phrygians  in  favour  of  their  native 
land,  for  which  they  claimed  the  credit  of  beirtg 
the  oldest  country  on  earth,  as  when  Montanus 
makes  the  village  Pepnza  in  Phrygia  the  seat 
of  the  Millenarian  empire. 

j-  We  are  without  sufficient  and  trustworthy 
data,  to  determine  with  precision,  any  thing  cer- 
tain with  regard  to  the  time,  in  which  Montanus 
first  appeared ;  but  from  the  very  nature  of  the 
thing,  the  beginning  of  a  matter  like  this  is  always 
ditiicult  to  be  determined.  Eusebius,  in  his 
Chronicon,  places  the  first  appearance  of  Mon- 
tanus  in  tlte  year  171.  But  if  we  suppose 
that  the  Roman  T3ishop,  wiiom  Praxeas  induced 
to  excommunicate  Montanus,  was  not  Victor,  but 
Ekuf/icros,  (for  which  opinion  I  have  slated  the 
reason.s  in  my  work  on  Tertullian,  p.  486,)  it 
would  follow,  that  .Montanus  had  appeared  in  the 
time  of  the  Roman  Bishop  Anicetus,  who  died  in 
the  yearlGl.  Apollonius  (ap.  Euseb.  v.  18,)  and 
Epiphanius,  who  place  the  appearance  of  Mon- 
tanus in  the  year  157,  are  both  in  favour  of  the 
earlier  date. 


328 

and  the  defenders  of  the  old  simple  doc- 
trines, and  men  were  speaking  much  of 
impending  corruptions  of  Christianity. 
All  this  might  work  upon  the  mind  of  the 
newly  converted  Phrygian,  inclined  as  he 
was  to  fantastic  excitement  of  the  feelings. 
The  transition  was  then  just  taking  place 
from  the  time  of  the  first  preternatural 
influences  of  the  Divine  Spirit  on  tlie  na- 
ture of  man,  to  the  season  in  which  the 
new  Divine  principle  of  life  was  to  be  de- 
veloped by  the  natural  channels  and  in  a 
quiet  harmonious  manner,  in  man's  na-  [ 
ture  sanctified  by  that  very  principle  of 
life  as  an  instrument  affecting  it-,  and  it  | 
was  natural  that  this  transition  should  be  I 
accompanied  by  many  disturbing  circum-  | 
stances,  and  that  a  disposition  should  \ 
arise,  which,  opposing  the  development 
of  Christianity  in  man's  nature  in  a  man- 
ner consonant  to  its  usual  course,  should 
wish  to  keep  that  first  season  of  the  ap- 
pearance of  Christianity  as  an  abiding 
condition  of  things,  and  then  to  the  gen- 
nine  working  of  the  Divine  Spirit  there 
would  be  joined  an  overheated  excite- 
ment of  the  mind,  which  imitated  that 
working,  but  was  in  fact  a  violent  excite- 
ment of  the  imagination.  All  this  must 
be  taken  into  the  account  in  order  to 
explain  the  rise  of  a  character  like 
Montanus. 

We  do  not  desire  to  deny,  that  Mon- 
tanus had  experienced  something  of  the 
more  spiritual  (literally,  higher)  life  of 
Christianity  ;  that  mixture  of  truth  and 
error  could  liardly  have  existed  without 
this  in  the  soul  of  Montanus,  but  in  indi- 
viduals as  well  as  in  whole  masses  the 
old  proverb  is  sure  to  be  found  true ; 
'  where  God  builds  himself  a  temple,  the 
Devil  builds  himself  a  chapel  near  it." 
The  old  Phrijgian  nature  crept  in  unper- 
ceived  so  as  to  trouble  the  pure  Christian 
feelings,  and  Montanus  took  for  an  in- 
spiration of  the  Spirit,  what  really  was 
from  the  flesh  :  while  no  one  of  sound 
judgment  with  a  Christian  care  for  his 
soul  warned  him  against  the  mixture  of 
light  and  darkness,  and  brought  him  back 
to  sobriety  ;  or,  perhaps,  if  they  did,  the 
admiration  of  the  multitude,  who  rever- 
enced him  as  a  Prophet,  made  a  greater 
impression  upon  him ;  and  tlius  appa- 
rently the  most  dangerous  source  of  all 
self-deception  and  all  enthusiasm,  vanillic 
was  added  to  these  disadvantages.  He 
used  to  fall  into  a  kind  of  transport, 
during  which,  widiout  consciousness,  but 
as  the  passive  instrument,  as  he  thought, 
of  a  higher  power,  he  announced  new  I 


ERRORS    OF   MONTANUS. 


persecutions  in  enigmatical  and  mystical 
expressions  ;*  he  exhorted  Christians  to 
a  more  strict  ascetic  life,  and  to  an  un- 
daunted confession  of  their  faith ;  lie 
praised  the  blessedness  of  martyrdom, 
and  incited  Christians  to  use  their  utmost 
endeavours  to  obtain  it;  and  during  tliese 
transports  he  also  announced  the  near 
approach  of  God's  judicial  punishment 
of  the  persecutors  of  the  Church,  as  well 
as  of  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  and 
the  establishment  of  the  Millenarian 
kingdom,  the  blessedness  of  which  he 
painted  in  attractive  colours.  At  last  he 
desired  to  be  looked  upon  as  a  prophet 
sent  from  God  for  the  whole  Church,  as 
an  eidightened  reformer  of  the  whole  re- 
ligious life  of  the  Church — the  Christian 
Church  was  through  him  to  be  raised  to 
a  higher  degree  of  perfection  in  conduct, 
and  a  highei  moral  doctrine  was  to  be 
revealed  through  him  for  the  manhood  of 
the  Church  in  its  state  of  maturity — and 
he  referred  to  himself  the  promise  of 
Christ,  that  through  the  Holy  Ghost  he 
would  reveal  things,  which  the  men  of 
that  time  Avere  unable  to  comprehendo 
He  also  believed  himself  called  to  com- 
municate nev/  decisions  with  respect  to 
doctrinal  points,  in  order  to  clear  up  the 
doctrinal  controversies  then  particularly 
common  in  those  regions,  and  to  preserve 
the  doctrines  of  the  Faith  against  the  at- 
tacks of  Heretics. 

It  is  likely  enough  that  Montanus  did 
not  aspire  to  all  this  at  once.,  but  that  his 
views  with  regard  to  his  own  person  and 
calling,  and  his  claims  in  regard  to  what 
he  was  to  be  to  the  Church,  were  gra- 
dually formed  and  extended  under  the 
influence  of  circumstances,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  acceptance  which  his  pre- 
tended oracles  obtained  ;  but  the  informa- 
tion we  have  is  not  sufficient  to  enable  us 
to  deduce  from  it  a  genetic  development  of 
the  history  of  Montanus.  Two  women, 
Prisca  or  Priscilla,  and  Maximilla,  who 
also  desired  to  be  looked  upon  as  prophe- 
tesses, joined  themselves  to  Montanus-t 

Montanism  maintained  the  doctrine  of 


*  ^ivo<pa)vi:ii  is  the  cxpresssion  of  a  eontcin 
porary,  ap.  Euseb.  v.  16.  yKM^T-M.  See  Plutarch 
on  tlie  ancient  oracular  responses,  <le  Pyth.  Orac, 
c.  24.  [I  find  only  the  verb  ^ivc^unsv,  not  the 
word  '^iK<pai-itAi  applied  here  to  Montanus,  The 
word  Entziickungen,  which  I  have  translated  traii:^- 
ptn-fs,  expresses  any  kind  of  ecstacy,  transport, 
or  trance,  the  Greek  phrase  in  Euseb.  v.  16 ;  tz^jx- 
3-T««c  is  used  here  for  a  state  of  excitement,'' in 
which  a  person  is  beside  himself.  See  Valesius 
in  loc— H.  .1.  R.] 

f  All  the  doctrines  which  the  Montanistic  party 


SPIRIT    OF   MONTAMSM. 


329 


fl  gradual  advance  of  the.  Church  accord- 
ing to  a  general  lato  of  the  development 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.  In  the  works  of 
grace,  say  the  Montanists,  as  well  as  in 
the  works  of  nature,  both  of  which 
come  from  tl:e  same  Creator,  every  thin;^ 
developcs  itself  according  to  a  certain 
gradation  :  from  the  seed  first  comes  a 
shrub,  which  gradually  increases  to  a  tree  ; 
the  tree  first  obtains  leaves,  then  follows 
the  bloom,  and  out  of  this  comes  the  fruit, 
which  also  attains  to  ripeness  only  by 
degrees..  Thus  also  the  kingdom  of 
rigliteousness  developes  itself  by  certain 
degrees ;  first  came  the  fear  of  God  in 
accordance  with  the  voice  of  nature  wiUi- 
out  a  revealed  law  (tlie  Patriarchal  Re- 
ligion •,)  then  came  its  infancy  under  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets,  then  its  youth 
under  the  Gospel,  then  its  development  to 
the  maturity  of  manhood  through  the 
new  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to- 
gether with  the  appearance  of  Montanus, 
and  through  the  new  teaching  of  the  pro- 
mised Paraclete.*  How  could  the  work 
of  God  stand  still,  and  not  develope  itself 
progressively,  when  the  kingdom  of  the 
wicked  one  was  always  extending  itself 
in  all  directions,  and  always  acquiring 
new  powers  .'  They  maintained,  there- 
fore, a  progressively  advancing  action  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  in  redeemed  man ;  the 
progressive  revelation  of  the  Divine,  op- 
posed to  the  progressive  revelation  of  the 
Evil  one.  They  opposed  those  who 
would  place  arbitrary  limits  to  the  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  if  his  extraor- 
dinary operations  had  been  confined  en- 
tirely to  the  time  of  the  apostles,  as  it  is 
said  in  a  jMontanistic  writing,!  "-lest  any 
weakness  or  want  of  faith  should  lead 
us  to  believe  that  the  grace  of  God  was 
efficacious  only  among  the  ancients,  for 
God  always  works  what  he  has  promised, 
as  a  sign  to  the  unbelieving,  and  as  a 
mercy  to  believers."  They  appealed  to 
die  promise  made  by  Christ  himself,  that 
He  would  give  to  the  faithful  the  Re- 
brought  forward,  were  not  altogether  peculiar  to  it ; 
they  were  often  only  ideas  which  had  l)ecn  in  ex- 
istence for  a  long  time,  and  were  current  in  the 
Church  just  at  that  time,  and  which,  being  car- 
ried to  the  extreme  by  the  Montanists,  called  forth 
also  an  opposition  to  them. 

*   Tertullian  de  Virgg.  Velandis,  c.  I. 

j-  Acta  Pcrpctuaj  et  Felicitatis,  Prjef. 

[Ruinart,  in  his  preliminary  observations,  en- 
deavours to  show  that  this  is  not  a  Montanistic 
writing,  and  to  explain  this  passage,  as  merely 
comparing  the  then  workings  of  God  with  former 
ones,  but  not  with  those  recorded  in  Scripture. 
— H.  J.  R.l 

42 


velations  through  the  Paraclete,  as  the 
perfecter  of  his  Church,  through  whom 
He  would  reveal  what  men  at  that  time 
were  unable  to  comprehend.  They  did 
not,  however,  by  any  means,  M'ish  to 
maintain,  that  this  promise  did  not  refer 
to  the  case  of  the  apostles,  to  whom  all 
odiers  referred  it;  but  merely  that  it  did 
not  refer  to  the  case  of  the  apostles  alone.^ 
in  whom  it  was  not  fulfilled  in  its  whole 
extent,  and  that  it  had  reference  also  to 
the  new  revelations  Uirough  the  prophets, 
who  were  now  raised  up,  and  that  these 
last  were  necessary,  in  order  to  the  com- 
pletion and  advancement  of  the  first  reve- 
lation.* They  declared  expressly  that 
the  new  prophets  must  distinguish  them- 
selves from  false  teacliers,  and  certify  their 
Divine  calling  by  their  agreement  with 
the  doctrines  preached  by  the  apostles, 
as  they  had  been  disseminated  in  all 
Churches.  The  essential  fundamental 
doctrines  recognised  in  the  whole  Church, 
they  recognised  also  as  unalterable  foun- 
dations of  the  development  of  the  Church  ; 
but  the  whole  system  of  Christian  mo- 
rality, and  the  whole  religious  life  con- 
nected with  the  Church  system,  was  to  be 
farther  advanced  by  these  new  revelations  ; 
for  men  who  were  just  converted  from 
heathenism,  and  only  just  emerging  from 
an  entirely  carnal  state,  were  unable  to 
receive  the  whole  demands  of  Christian 
perfection.  And  farther  also,  the  Chris- 
tian doctrines  which  were  attacked  by  the 
heretics,  who  were  now  extending  them- 
selves in  every  direction,  were  to  be  firmly 
established  by  these  new  revelations. 
While  these  heretics,  by  means  of  arbi- 
trary and  false  explanations,  made  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  out  of  which  tliey  might 
have  been  best  confuted,  speak  their  lan- 
guage, Uiese  new  revelations  were  to  offer 
the  means  of  opposing  them  with  settled 
authority.  Lastly,  these  new  revelations 
were  to  communicate  decisions  and  deter- 
minations respecting  those  jnatters  of 
doctrine  and  practice  which  were  dien 
made  the  subject  of  controversy .|  The 
Montanist  Tertullian,  therefore,  at  the 
conclusion  of  his  treatise,  concerning  the 
Resurrection,  calls  thus  to  those  who  de- 
sire to  draw  from  the  well  of  Uiese  new  re- 
velations, "  yc  shall  not  thirst  after  any  in- 
struction ;  no  inquiries  shall  torment  you." 
This  notion  of  a  progressive  develop- 


*   Tertullian  dc  Pudicit.  c.  12. 

I  Tertullian  de  Virgg.  Velandis,  as  the  admin- 
istratio  Paraclcti,  quod  disciplina  dirigitur,  quod 
Scripture  revclantur,  quod  intellectus  rcformatur. 
2e2 


330 

ment  of  the  Church  led  the  Montanists, 
on  the  one  hand*  to  a  genuine  evangelical 
opposition  against  a  narroiv-hearted  and 
stiff  Church  view,  ivhich  clung  only  to 
outward  things ;  a  view  which  was  unable 
to  distinguish  between  what  is  changeable 
and  what  is  unchangeable  in  the  Church, 
{churchhj  life,  literally,)  and  which  looked 
upon  those  of  its  forms,  its  outward 
ordinances  and  usages,  which  might 
properly  change  with  time  and  circum- 
stances, as  grounded  upon  apostolical 
tradition,  and  settled  irrevocably  for  all 
ages.  The  Montanists,  on  the  contrary, 
were  better  able  to  distinguish  between 
the  changeable  and  the  unchangeable  in  the 
development  of  the  Church,  because  they 
would  allow  of  nothing  but  tiie  immuta- 
hility  of  the  dogmatic  tradition ;  they 
maintained,  that  the  arrangements  and  or- 
dinances of  the  Church  might  be  changed 
and  improved,  according  to  the  necessities 
of  the  times,  by  means  of  the  progressive 
instruction  of  the  Paracl€.te.\  And  farther, 
while  the  ecclesiastical  view  considered 
the  bishops  as  the  only  organs  for  the 
shedding  abroad  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
the  Churcli,  as  the  successors  of  the 
apostles,  and  the  heirs  of  their  spiritual 
power,  Montanism,  on  the  contrary,  al- 
though, upon  the  whole,  it  acknowledged 
the  existing  order  in  the  Church  as  one 
founded  by  God,  yet  maintained  that 
there  are  still  higher  organs  to  conduct 
the  development  of  the  Church  than  these 
ordinary  ones,  namely,  the  extraordinary 
organs,  the  prophets  inspired  by  the  Holy 
Ghost.  These  alone,  according  to  the 
Montanislic  view,  were  the  successors  of 
the  apostles  in  the  highest  sense,  the 
heirs  of  their  perfect  spiritual  power. 
TertuUian,  therefore,  sots  the  Church  of 
the  S])irit,  rchich  reveals  itself  by  means 
of  men  enlightened  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  in 
opposition  to  the  Church,  ivhich  consists 
in  its  number  of  bishops.'^^  Thus  those 
who  followed  the  voice  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  speaking  through  the  new  pro- 
phets, as  being  the  spiritually-minded,  the 
genuine  Cliristians,  were  considered  to 
make  up  the  Church  ;  while,  on  the  con- 
trary, they  called  the  opponents  of  the 
new  revelations,  the  carnally-minded 
(Psychici.)  Montanism,  therefore,  which 
made  the  inward  fact  of  the  operation  of 

•  [See  the  counterbalancing  error  a  page  or  two 
farther  on.— H.  J,  R.] 

f  Tertull.  de  Corona  Mil.  c.  3. 

■^  De  Pudicit,  c.  21.  Ecclesia  spiritus  per  spirit- 
alem  homineni,  non  ecclesia  numcrus  episco- 
porum. 


MONTANISTIC    VIEWS. 


the  Holy  Ghost  the  mark  of  the  true 
Church,  when  contrasted  with  Catho- 
licism,* whose  characters  are  too  ex- 
ternal, leads  to  a  more  spiritual  conception 
of  the  notion  of  the  Church,  and  one 
whose  view  was  more  directed  to  inward 
things.  TertuUian  says,|  "  The  Church, 
in  the  peculiar  and  the  most  excellent 
sense,  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  which  the 
Three  are  One,  and  therefore,  the  whole 
union  of  those  who  agree  in  this  belief 
(viz.  that  God  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  are  one,)  is  named  the 
Church,  after  its  founder  and  sanctitier 
(the  Holy  Ghost.") 

As   farther,  according  to  the  Montan- 
istic  theory,  prophets  might  be  raised  up 
out  of  every  class  of  Cliristians, — as  the 
j  Montanists  looked  upon  it  expressly  as 
something  characteristic  of  this  last  epoch 
I  of  the  development  of  the  kingdom  of 
j  God,  that,  according  to   the   prophecies 
I  of  Joel,  ch.  iii.  [ch.  ii.]   then  in  course  of 
fulfilment,^  the  gifts  of  the  Spirit  should 
I  indifferently   be    shed   abroad    over    all 
classes  of  Christians  of  both  sexes, — and 
as    those  requirements,  with    respect    to 
Christian   conduct,  which    had   till    then 
been  limited  to  the  clergy,  were  extended 
<  by  these  new  revelations  to  all  Christians 
I  as  such,  they  were  induced  by  these  cir- 
cumstances to  bring  forward  the  idea  of 
the  "  dignity  of  the   Christian  calling  in 
general,  and  of  the  dignity  of  the  priest- 
hood as  belonging  to  all  Christians."§ 

But  although,  on  one  side,  the  idea  of 
the  Church  was  conceived  here  in  a  more 
free  and  spiritual  manner,  although  Mon- 
tanism opposed  the  idea  of  a  progressive 
development  of  the  Church  to  that  form- 
bound  system,  which  was  more  Jewish 


*  [Literally,  "co7itra^ied   ivith   the   too   out- 
ward Cathulicism." — H.  J.  R.] 

-j-   [Nam  et  Ecclesia  proprie  et  principaliter  ipse 

est  Spiritus  in  quo  est  trinitas  unius  divinitatis 

Pater  et  Filius  et  Spiritus  Sanctus.      lUam  Ec- 

clesiam  congregat,  quam  Dominus  in  tribus  jwsuit. 

'  Atque   ita  exinde  ctiam  numerus   omnis  qui  in 

hanc  fidem  conspiravcrint,  Ecclesia  ab  auctore  et 

consecratore  censetur.      Test,  de  Pudicit.  §  xxi. 

Comp.  also  de  Baptismo,  vi.;  where,  after  men- 

l  tioning  the  Church,  TertulUan  adds,    "  quoniam 

;  ubi  tres,  id  est,  Pater  et  Filius  et  Spiritus  Sanctus, 

!  ibi  Ecclesia,  quaj  trium  corpus  est."     TertuUian 

■  himself,  in  another  passage,  supplies  an  excellent 

I  antidote  to  the  heretical  notion  of  an  appeal  to  any 

.  inward  gifts  being  of  themselves  sufficient  marks 

of  the  true  'Church.     His  rule,  though  directed 

again.st  other  heresies,  applies  to  this  notion  also. 

See  the  well  known  passage  de  Pra;script.  HsreL 

"  Edant  origines  suas,"  &c. — H.  J.  R.] 

i   Prajfat.  act.  Felicit. 

§  As.  e,  g.  TertuUian  do  Monogamia. 


MONTANISTIC    PROPHECY. 


than    Evangelical,  yet,  on  another   side, 
this  idea  fell  even  still  more  than  the 
Catholicism  of  the  Church,  into  a  confu- 
sion between  the  theocratic  views  of  the 
Old  and  JS''ao  Testaments ;  for,  according 
to  the  Montanistic  notions,  that  progres- 
sive development  was   not,  as  the  nature 
of  the  Gospel  would  require,  to  proceed 
from  within  outwards,  by  the    develop- 
ment of  the  self-sufficient   principle  of 
Christianity  in  the  nature  of  man,  in  virtue 
of  the  Divine  power  indwelling  in  it,  but 
they  (i.  e.  the  Montanists)  maintained  that 
this    progressive    development    of     the 
Church  must  be  promoted  by  new  out- 
ward additional  and  extraordinary  com- 
munications of  God;  they  maintained  that 
the  Church  must  he  farther  fashioned  and 
completed  hij  means  of  a  completion  of 
the  apostolical  instruction,  through  pro-  ' 
phels,  who  would  be  excited  and  enlight- 
ened in  an  extraordinary  manner  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  they  ascribed  to  the  de- 
clarations  of  these   prophets  a    positive 
authority,    which    bound    men    to    obey 
them.     In  fact,  they  transferred  the  pro- 
phetical   government    of  the  Old    Testa- 
ment to  the  Christian  Church.     And  it  is 
worthy  of  observation,  that  by  the  Catho-  j 
lie  Church,  which  afterwards  in  a  general  ' 
way  received  much  which  it  had  at  first 
justly  and  on  right  evangelical  principles 
blamed  in  the  Montanists,  much  of  what 
the  Montanists   maintained,  about  the  re-  j 
lations    of  the   new  revelations  through  j 
their  prophets  to  the  foundation  of  scrip-  \ 
tural  tradition  and  scriptural  doctrine,  was  ' 
applied  to  the  rehition  of  the  doctrinal  de-  ! 
crees  of  General  Councils  to  both  these  j 
particulars  (i.  e.  tradition  and  Scripture.)    j 
The  Montanistic  view  of  this  new  pro-  < 
phetic  gift  [Prophetenthum,]  and  of  the  ■ 
mode  of  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ; 
in    it,  was   also  peculiar.     It  was  in  ac-  ' 
cordance  with  this  whole  cast  of  thought,  I 
that  the  Montanists  should  altogether  ex-  j 
elude  from  the   true  prophetic  gift  [Pro- 
phetenthum]    the     co-operation    of    any 
human    faculty,  endowed   with    self-con- 
sciousness, and  serving  as  a  free  instru- 
ment   for  a  Divine    communication,  and 
that  they  should  assume  an  operation  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  which  entirely  destroyed 
all  individual  agency  on  the  part  of  man  ; 
the  condition  of  a  complete  ecstacy  was 
reckoned    by  them  as    an    indispensable 
mark  of  a  true    prophet.     Therefore,  in 
the  Montanistic    oracles,  it  is    not    man 
speaking  in  the  name  of  God,  but  God 
speaking  through  the  voice  of  man.  Tlius, 


331 


the  Holy  Ghost  says  through  IMontanus,* 
"Behold!  man  is  like  a  lyre,  and  [  flutter 
over  him  like  the  instrument  which  sets 
the  lyre  in  motion.  Tlie  man  sleeps,  but 
I  awake.  See,  it  is  the  Lord  vvho  sets  the 
hearts  of  men  out  of  themselves,  and 
gives  the  heart  to  man  ;"  and  in  another 
oracle  he  says,  "  No  angel  comes,  no 
messenger,  but  I  the  Lord,  God  the 
Father,  am  come."t  This  idea  of  in- 
spiration was  certainly  nothing  new  in 
the  Church,  it  was  the  oldest  conception 
of  the  idea  of  inspiration  which  existed 
in  the  theological  schools  of  the  Jews,  and 
which  we  find  in  Philo,  in  the  legend  of 
the  origin  of  the  Septuagint  version,  and 
it  passed  from  the  Jews  to  the  Christian 
fathers  (teachers,)  just  as  they  received 
with  the  Old  Testament  the  idea  of  in- 
spiration also  first  from  the  Jews.  But 
this  whole  view  of  the  matter  came  under 
suspicion,  in  consequence  of  the  manner 
in  which  the  Montanists  pushed  their  no- 
tion of  ecstatic  possession  (/(7.  ecstasy) 
to  extremes.  The  controversies  with 
them  introduced  more  accurate  investiga- 
tions, concerning  the  idea  of  Divine  in- 
spiration, and  concerning  the  difference 
between  a  genuine  and  a  counterfeit  inspi- 
ration (or,  as  it  was  then  called,  an  inspira- 
tion by  evil  spirits.)  Unhappily,  none  of 
the  writings,  in  which  these  controversies 
were  handled,  have  come  down  to  us. 
The  Montanists  might  justly  be  accused 
of  having  prized  beyond  their  value  these 
unusual  conditions  of  the  mind  during  an 
extraordinary  inward  excitement,  in  which 
the  common  consciousness  of  man  is  set 
aside,  the  same  accusation  which  St.  Paul 
makes  against  the  Corinthians,  in  1  Cor. 
xii.,  where  he  speaks  against  overprizing 
the  TTvev/xaTi  or  yXua-a-ri  T^aXtiv  (the  speak- 
ing in  the  spirit,  or  with  tongues;)  it 
might  justly  be  said,  that  these  conditions 
of  mind  belonged  more  to  the  economy 
of  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Divine  Spirit  on  the  mind 
was  rather  of  a  transient  and  a  fragmentary 
nature,  than  to  that  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  which  the  Divine  life  enters  as 
an  enlivening,  and  leavening  (///.  pene- 
trating) spirit  into  llie  natural  develop- 
ment of  man's  nature;  or  it  might  be  said 


*  Epiphan.  H.-Erc*.  48.  §  4. 

f  The  definition  of  such  an  ecstacy  in  the 
Montanistic  spirit  is  to  he  foiinrl  in  Tertuilian  c. 
Marcion.  IV".  22.  "In  spiritu  homo  coniHitutus, 
prsDsertim  cum  gloriaiii  Dei  conspicit,  ril  cum  per 
ipsum  Deus  loquitur,  ncccssc  est  e.xcidat  sensu, 
obiimbratus  scilicet  virtute  liivina." 


332 


MONTANISTIC    MORALS. 


that  such  conditions  of  mind  belonged 
pecuharly  to  those  epochs  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  in  which  the  new  life,  which 
Christianity  brings  with  it,  is  for  the  first 
t.im''  communicated  to  an  entirely  unpre- 
pared (lit.  rough)  portion  of  mankind  ;  or 
when  a  new  era  of  the  outpouring  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  follows  upon  a  long  reign  of 
ungodliness  and  worldliness.  But  the 
violent  opponents  of  the  Montanists*  ap- 
pear to  have  fallen  just  into  the  opposite 
extreme,  by  condemning  altogether  every 
thing,  which  bore  the  appearance  of  an 
ecstacy  in  the  Montanistic  sense,  and  by 
wishing  to  limit  to  one  form  all  the  ope- 
rations of  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  re- 
jected at  once  the  whole  Montanistic  idea 
of  a  prophet,  and  on  the  contrary,  they 
afterwards  maintained  with  regard  to  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  that  they 
liad  already  possessed  a  clear  knowledge 
of  the  Christian  economy  predicted  by 
them.j 

It  appears  also  to  have  been  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Montanists,  that  the  season 
of  the  last  and  richest  onlpouring  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  loould  form  the  last  age  of 
the  Church,  andprecede  the  second  coming 
of  Christ,  and  be  the  fulfilment  of  the 
})rophecy  of  Joel,  ch.  iii.;{;  [ch.  ii.]  ;  the 
only  doubtful  point  is,  whether  according 
to  the  Montanistic  doctrine,  this  last  out- 
pouring o-f  the  Holy  Ghost  was  to  be  I 
closed  by  the  appearance  of  Montanus, 
and  his  prophetesses,  or  whether  other 
prophets  were  to  succeed  after  -him.  | 
Maximilla,  indeed,  as  quoted  in  Epipha-  ! 
nius,  says,  "that  no  other  prophetess 
would  follow  after  her,  but  that  the  end  | 
of  the  world  would  immediately  take 
place  •,"  but  a  question  arises,  as  to  whe- 
ther the  Montanistic  oracles  were  always 
exactly  in  harmony  v.'ith  themselves,  and 
with  one  another,  unless,  perhaps,  Monta-  ] 
nus  and  his  two  prophetesses  were  looked 
upon  pre-eminently  as  oracles  for  the 
whole  Church.  It  is  besides  certain  from 
the  Avritings  of  TertuUian,  as  we  may  also 
infer  from  the  use  made  by  the  Monta- 
nists of  the  prophetic  passage  quoted 
above,  that  they  supposed  that  all  Chris- 
tians would  be  partakers  in  those  extraor- 


dinary spiritual  gifts.  In  the  Montanistic 
congregations,  it  was  chietly  among  fe- 
males, a  circumstance  easily  explained, 
that  people  expected  to  find  in  these  pre- 
ternatural communications,  such  a  know- 
ledge of  Divine  things,  as  no  sound  prac- 
tical Christian  feeling  would  ever  induce 
meiT  to  expect  at  all,  or  at  least  to  look 
for  any  where  else  than  in  Scripture,  or 
in  the  Reason,  enlightened  by  Scripture. 
It  was  a  punishment  for  despising  the  just 
limits  of  that-which-naturally-belongs-to- 
man,  {lit.  the  Naturally-Human,)  which 
will  assert  its  own  rights  and  be  recog- 
nised and  cultivated  in  its  own  place, — it 
was  a  punishment  for  such  contempt,  that 
this  latter  (the  Naturally-Human)  should 
thrust  itself  into  a  higher  region  and  trou- 
ble it,  and  that  the  symptoms  of  a  mor- 
bidly excited  nature  should  be  promoted, 
and  should  be  honoured, as  the  inspiration 
of  the  Spirit.*  In  this  manner  the  heathen 
system  af- oracles  and  auguries  might  be 
introduced  under  a  Christian  garb  into  the 
Christian  Church. 

As  the  attainment  of  perfection  in 
Christian  conduct,  of  which  Montanism 
was  inclined  to  lay  the  foundation,  was 
not  deduced  from  the  nature  of  Chris- 
tianity, working  outwardly  from  a  prin- 
ciple within,  but  was  to  repose  on  new 
commands,  which  were  added  to  Chris- 
tianity through  a  pretended  Divine  au- 
thority, and  were  first  delivered  out- 
wardly ;  so  tliis  pretended  perfecting  of 
the  moral  doctrine  of  Christianity  might 
in  fact  be  only  an  error,  deduced  from 
the  essential  nature  of  Christianity  itself 
according  to  which  all  is  contained  in 
Love,  and  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the 
Law  ;  it  might  become  only  a  counterfeit 
of  that,  by  means  of  a  new  legal  op7is 
opcratum.  Even  on  this  side,  Montanism 
joined  itself  to  an  already  existing  ten- 
dency of  Christianity,  which  it  only  carried 
to  the  extreme.  That  ascetic  tendency, 
which  attributed  a  merit  to  certain  out- 
ward works  of  abstinence,  and  which 
would  make  the  essence  of  humility, 
whose  foundations  are  within,  consist  in 
certain  outward  gestures,  by  which  hu- 
mility would  easily  be  feigned  (was  also 


*  As  Miltiades  in  the  book  »•«§/  tcu  ^«  im  rr^c- 

j-  E.  g.  Origen.  in  Joh.  T.  VI.  §  2.  Tr^oTriTai; 
iJ«-c<f>)i'«5'6«(  TTs^i  T^O'^iiTaiv,  i!Lf  ou  iro<fa";,  a   fj-n  vivo>i- 

K'-lCrt    T-X    iTTO     th'.V    O-TO^tf-TOC. 

i  Prsfat.  in  acta  Perpetuas :  majora  reputandii, 
nobiliora  qua;que  ut  novissimiora,  secundum  cxu- 
berationem  gratioe  in  ultima  sseculi  spatia  de- 
cietam. 


*  Thus  in  a  Montanistic  consrregation  at  Car- 
thage in  the  case  of  a  Christian  female,  who  dur- 
ing the  service  had  fallen  into  an  ecstacy,  which 
resembled  those  described  as  the  eflect  of  Mag- 
nctic  Somnambulism,  they  expected  to  obtain 
from  her  not  only  the  healing  of  diseases,  as  the 
Heathen  did  in  their  incubations  in  the  Temple  of 
I  Esculapius,  but  also  information  concerning  the 
'  invisible  world.     See  TertuUian  de  Anima,  c.  9. 


THEIR    VIEWS    OS    MARRIAGE. 


taken  up  by  Montanism.*)  The  Mon- 
tanistic  prophets,  wished  to  prescribe  as 
binding  on  all  Christians,  the  fasting  on 
the  dies  Slatioman^  which  up  to  that  time 
(see  above,)  had  been  considered  as  left 
to  their  free  choice,  and  they  commanded 
this  fast  to  be  extended  to  three  o'clock 
in  the  afternoon.  For  two  weeks  in  the 
year  they  prescribed  for  all  Christians,  as 
a  compulsory  ordinance,  such  a  spare  diet 
as  the  conlinentes,  or  acry.»)T«»  observed 
from  free  inclination-!  Against  these 
Montanistic  positions  the  spirit  of  evan- 
gelical freedom  expressly  and  becomingly 
remonstrated;  but  in  later  times,  in  this 
respect  also  the  spirit,  which  then  gave 
utterance  to  its  sentiments  in  IMontanism, 
passed  over  into  the  Catholic  Church. 

That  enthusiastic  tendency,  which  in- 
duced many  Christians  to  give  themselves 
up  to  martyrdom  was  carried  by  Mon- 
tanism to  its  flirthest  height.  The  Mon- 
tanists  condemned  flight  in  seasons  of 
persecution,  and  other  innocent  means  of 
saving  life,  while  they  laid  down  a  prin- 
ciple, which,  if  consistently  carried  out, 
would  have  overwhelmed  every  social 
constitution,  and  destroyed  all  activity  on 
the  part  of  man,  viz.,  that  man  giving 
himself  up  wholly  to  the  will  of  God, 
must  use  no  means  in  order  to  avoid  the 
persecutions  which  the  will  of  God  has 
permitted  to  impend  over  Christians,  for 
the  trial  of  their  faith.J  The  Montanistic 
prophetic  spirit  incited  men  to  strive  to 
win  the  martyr's  crown  for  themselves. 
We  recognise  that  morbidly  excited,  over 
wrought  state  of  feeling,  which  was  alto- 
gether deficient  in  Christian  reverence  for 
all  that  is  pure  in  human  nature,  and  in 

*  [The  words  in  a  parenthesis  have  been  added 
to  the  original,  in  which  the  sense  is  left  quite  in- 
complete. The  sentence  stands  thus :  "  Jene 
ascetische  Riclitung,  welche  gewissen  ilusserlichen 
Werken  der  Enthaltung  ein  Verdienst  beilegte, 
welche  das  Wesen  der  im  Innern  begnindeten 
Demuth  an  gewisse  (iusserliche  Geberden,  wo- 
durch  leicht  die  Demuth  erhcuchelt  werden 
konnte,  binden  wollte." — H.  J.  H.] 

j-  The  Xerophagia,  as  they  were  called,  Sun- 
day and  Saturday,  were  exempted  from  this  fast 
The  Montanists  were  also  in  controversy  (see 
above,)  with  the  Romish  Church,  about  not  fasting 
on  the  Saturday.  In  the  time  of  Jerome,  in  which, 
however,  the  Montanists  appear  to  have  departed 
considerably  from  their  original  views,  (e.  g.  in  the 
matter  of  the  constitution  of  the  Church,)  they 
had  three  weeks  of  Xerophagire.  These  may  be 
compared  with  the  Quadragesimal  Fiists  of  the 
later  Church,  a  name,  indeed,  which  .Jerome  ap- 
plies to  them.  Ep.  27,  ad  Marcellum, "  illi  tres  in 
anno  faciunt  quadragesimas." 

I  Sec  Tertullian  de  Fuga  in  Persecutione. 


333 


Christian  tenderness  of  feeling,  in    thi 


expression  of  xAIontanus:  "Desire  not  to 
I  die  upon  your  beds,  or  in  childbirth,  or 
I  in  the  debility  of  a  fever,  but  desire  to  die 
as  martyrs,  that  he  may  be  glorified  who 
died  for  you."     Thus  Montanism  went 
j  to  the  very  farthest  point  in  an  abrupt  re- 
jection  of  all    customs,  which,  though 
I  they  were  to  be  looked  upon  as    mere 
I  civil  institutions,  could  in  no  wise  be  de- 
j  duced  from  a   heathen  origin,  and  in  a 
'  neglect  of  all  the  prudential  measures  by 
which    the    jealousy  of    heathen    rulers 
might  be  obviated.*     It  appears  to  have 
been  objected,  among  other  things,  to  the 
Montanists,  that,  by  their  frequent  assem- 
blies for  prayer,  combined  with  their  fasts, 
they  violated  the  law  of  the  state  against 
secret  assemblies.! 

Although  the  ascetic  spirit  of  Mon- 
tanism promoted  a  false  over  estimate  of 
I  celibacy.]];  we  must  still  acknowledge  tliat- 
i  Montanism  expressly  brought  prominently 
j  forward  the  Christian  view  of  marriage  as  a 
I  spiritual  union,  sanctified  by  Christ.  The 
!  Montanists  considered  it  essential  to  a 
i  genuine  Christian  marriage,  that  it  should 
be  accompanied  by  a  religious  sanction, 
and  that  it  should  be  celebrated  in  the 
Church  in  the  name  of  Christ :  a  marriage 
celebrated  in  any  other  manner  they  looked 
upon  as  an  unpermitted  union.§     From 

*  [We  may  observe  from  the  History  of  St. 
Paul,  that  he  did  not  sanction  this  disregard  of 
prudence,  as  on  more  th;in  one  occasion  he  as- 
serted his  privileges  as  a  Roman  citizen :  see  e.  g. 
Acts  xxii.  2.5;  xxv.  11,  yet  no  man  can  accuse 
him  of  shrinking  from  persecution,  or  fearing 
martyrdom. — H.  J.  R.] 

I  De  Jcjuniis,  c.  13. 

t  Priscilla  exjiressly  declares  in  an  or.icular 
response,  (which  is  to  be  found  in  Tertulli  in  de 
Exhortatione  Castitatis,  c.  11,  but  only  in  the 
edition  of  Rigault,)  that  the  genuine  servant  of 
the  Temple,  who  is  an  instrument  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  must  live  in  celibacy.  In  this  also  Mon- 
tanism led  the  way  for  the  Catholic  Charrii.  [I 
have  searched  this  treatise  in  Rigault's  cili'io'i  of 
169.'i,  but  am  unable  to  verify  the  quotation. — H. 
J.  R.] 

§  Tertullian  de  Pudicitia,  c.  4.  Penes  nos 
occultae  quoque  conjunctioncs,  id  est  non  prius 
apud  ecclcsiam  profcssjc,  juxta  mocchiam  et  forni- 
cationem  judicari  periclitantur,  ncc  inde  consertai 
obtentu  matrimonii  crimen  eludant.  According 
to  the  principles  of  Montanism,  the  essence  of  a 
true  marriage  in  a  Christian  sense  would  consist 
in  this,  (Tertullian  de  Monogainia,  c.  20:)  "  Cum 
Deus  jungit  duos  in  unarn  carnem  aut  juiictos  de- 
prehendens  in  eadem  came  conjunctioncin  sig- 
navit."  (Where  to  a  marriage  concluded  between 
two  parties  while  they  were  yet  heathens,  the  sanc- 
tifying consecration  of  Christianity  was  added.) 
Montanism  prepared  the  way  for  the  notion  of 
considering  matrimony  as  a  sacrament. 


334 


this  view  of  marriage  it  would  follow 
also,  that  Montanism  would  admit  of  no 
second  marriage  after  the  death  of  the 
first  husband  or  loife ;  for  marriage,  as  an 
indissoluble  union  in  the  spirit,  and  not 
in  the  flesh  only,  was  to  endure  beyond 
the  grave.*  Here  also  the  Montanists  only 
carried  a  view  to  which  others  weve  in- 
clined, to  the  extreme,  in  consequence  of 
their  legal  spirit,^  [i.  e.  their  inclination 
to  bind  down  every  thing  by  compulsory 
rules.]  The  Montanists  also  belonged  to 
the  zealots  for  the  strict  principles  of 
penance^  as  were  afterwards  the  Nova- 
tianists,  (see  above,)  and  there  was  here 
shown  by  the  Montanistic  teachers  an 
ardent  zeal  for  sanctification,  and  an  honest 
apprehension,  lest  men  should  make  them- 
selves secure  in  their  sins  by  a  false  re- 
liance on  priestly  absolution  ;  but  it  must 
be  confessed  that  the  Montanists  might 
•easily  have  come  to  an  explanation  with 
their  opponents^  by  means  of  candid  dis- 
cussions on  what  is  objective  in  the  for- 
giveness of  sin,  and  on  the  relation  of 
absolution  to  that  (see  above.)  The  zeal 
for  sanctification,  as  opposed  to  a  false 
reliance  on  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  with- 
out any  entrance  into  an  inward  Spiritual 
communion  [literally,  Life-communion, 
or  communion  of  the  Life]  with  Christ,  is 
beautifully  expressed  in  those  words  with 
which  the  Montanist  TertuUian  opposes 
those  who  appealed  to  I  John  i.  7,  in  their 
opposition  to  the  severer  doctrines  of 
penance.  John  says,  "  if  we  walk  in 
the  Light,  as  he  is  in  the  Light ;  so  have 
we  communion  one  with  another,  and 
the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son,  makes 
us  free  from  all  sin.  But  do  we  sin  also, 
v/hile  we  walk  in  the  Light,  and  shall  we 
be  purified,  if  we  sin  in  the  Light?  By 
no  means.  For  he  who  sins,  is  not  in 
the  Light,  but  in  darkness.  He  shows 
also,  liow  we  may  become  purified  from 
all  yin,  if  we  walk  in  the  Light,m  which 
no  sin  can  take  place  ...  for  such  is 
the  cjficacxj  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  that 
those  whom  it  has  purified  from  sin,  and 
thus  raised  to  the  Light,  it  thenceforth 
preserves  from  sin,  if  they  continue  to 


VIEWS    OP   MARTYRDOM. 


*  See  TertuUian  de  Monogamia,  and  his  Ex- 
hortat.  Castitatis. 

f  Athenagoras  Legal,  pro  Christian,  p.  37,  cd. 
('oion.  calls  y^fAOi;  Siur^o;  ijTrejTDn:  /uoi^ua.  Origcii, 
Horn,  in  Malt.  Ibl.  363",  says'that  Paul  had  given 
the  permission  for  a  second  niarriage  after  Ihe 
death  of  the  first  husband,  or  the  first  wife,  7r^o( 

\  The  bo^ok  of  Tertuilian  de  Pudicilia  treats 
of  thia  controversy. 


walk  in  the  Light."*  It  is  true,  that  Mon- 
tanism, as  we  observed  above,  promoted 
a  wild  enthusiasm  for  martyrdom,  and 
honoured  the  over  estimate  of  martyrdom 
as  an  opus  operatum,  for,  according  to  the 
Montanistic  doctrines,  martyrs  were  to 
have  the  advantage  of  attaining  imme- 
diately after  death  to  a  higher  state  of 
blessedness,!  to  which  other  believers 
had  no  access ;  but  nevertheless,  the 
struggle  for  the  severity  of  penitential 
discipline  led  the  Montanist  Tertuilian  to 
contend  against  an  exaggerated  reverence 
for  the  martyrs.  For  while  many,  to 
whom  Montanism  refused  absolution, 
could  obtain  it  in  the  Catholic  Church 
by  the  interposition  of  the  confessors, 
Tertuilian  thus  expressed  himself  against 
a  false  reliance  on  the  sentence  pronounced 
in  their  favour  by  these  confessors,  and 
against  their  spiritual  presumption.  "■  Let 
it  be  sufficient  for  the  martyrs  to  have 
cleansed  themselves  from  their  own  sins. 
It  is  unthankfulness  or  pride,  to  lavish 
upon  others  also  what  a  man  must  think 
it  a  great  thing  to  have  obtained  for  him- 
self. Who  has  atoned  for  the  death  of 
another  by  his  own,  except  the  Son  of 
God  alone.''  ....  For  it  was  for  this 
purpose  that  He  came,  that  He  himself 
being  pure  from  sin,  and  perfectly  holy, 
might  die  for  sinners.  Thou,  therefore, 
who  endeavourest  to  rival  Him  in  the 
forgiveness  of  sins,  suffer  for  me,»if  thou 
hast  never  sinned  thyself!  But,  if  thou 
art  a  sinner  thyself,  how  can  the  oil  of 
thy  litde  lamp  be  sufficient  for  me  and 
for  thyself  too  ?"J 

If  the  Montanists  laid  especial  stress 
upon  the  doctrine  of  an  approaching  Mil- 
lenarian  reign  of  Christ  upon  the  earth, 
in  this  part  of  their  faith  they  agreed  with 
a  large  portion  of  the  rest  of  the  Chris- 
tian world. 

What  promoted  the  spread  of  Mon- 
tanism, was  partly  this  circumstance,  that 
it  only  carried  to  extremes  such  disposi- 
tions and  views  as  had  already  long  been 
in  existence  with  multitudes,  and  partly 
that  impulse  of  enthusiasm,  which  carries 
every  thing  along  with  it,  and  the  manner 
in  which  it  nourished  spiritual  pride,  be- 
cause all  those  who  acknowledged  the 
new  prophets  seemed  entitled  to  look 
upon  themselves  as  really  regenerated, 
and  as  members  of  the  elect  assembly  of 


•  De  Pudicitia,  c.  19. 
+  That  is   to   Paradise. 
Aninia,  c.  .56. 

^  De  Pudicitia,  c.  22. 


See  Tertuilian    de 


EXTERNAL    HISTORY    OF    MONTANISM. 


335 


the  spiritually  minded,  and  to  despise  all 
other  Christians,  as  carnally  minded,  and 
not  yet  regenerated.  Montanistic  con- 
gregations were  at  first  formed  in  Asia 
Minor,  bnt  there  arose  up  violent  oppo- 
nents to  it  among  the  Church-teachers  of 
weight,  authority,  and  influence,  who 
placed  the  Montanistic  prophets  in  the 
same  class  with  the  Energumcni,  (or  pos- 
sessed,) and  called  attention  to  the  danger 
which  threatened  pure  Christianity  and 
the  order  of  the  Church,  if  this  unclean 
spirit  should  gain  ground.  It  must  be 
confessed  that  these  teachers,  by  their 
blind  condemnation  of  Montanism  alto- 
gether, as  a  possession  of  the  Evil  Spirit, 
without  separating  what  is  false  from 
what  is  true  in  it,  contributed  exactly  to 
this  result,  that  the  enthusiastic  spirit 
should  harden  itself  more  and  more,  and 
spread  still  further.  Synods  were  held 
for  the  investigation  of  these  matters,  in 
which  many  declared  themselves  against 
Montanism:  the  transactions  of  these 
synods  were  transmitted  to  more  distant 
Churches,  and  thus  these  latter  were  also 
implicated  in  the  controversy.  But,  un- 
happily, from  the  want  of  sufficient  in- 
formation, great  obscurity  prevails  with 
respect  to  these  transactions,  and  thence 
also  with  respect  to  the  gradual  formation 
of  the  Montanistic  party  in  the  Church, 
and  its  relation  to  the  rest  of  the  Church. 
Although  the  Montanists  looked  upon 
themselves  alone  as  the  genuine  Chris- 
tians, and  their  adversaries  only  as  im- 
perfect ones,  who  occupied  a  lower  grade, 
and  believed  themselves  raised  up  above 
the  rest  of  the  Church,  yet  it  does  not 
appear  that  they  directly  separated  them- 
selves from  these  latter,  and  renounced 
communion  with  them ;  they  only  de- 
sired to  be  the  ccclesia  spiritus,  the  spi- 
ritalis  ecclesia  in  the  carnalis.  But  it 
must  be  acknowledged,  certainly,  that 
they  could  not  be  permitted  to  remain  in 
this  relation  to  the  rest  of  the  Church,  in 
which  they  were  continually  endeavour- 
ing to  extend  themselves  farther,  without 
great  danger  to  the  Churchly  life,  for  they 
claimed  only  toleration  at  the  first,  in 
order  to  attain  afterwards  gradually  to 
domination. 

As  the  Church  at  Lyons  (see  above,) 
when  it  was  visited  by  the  sanguinary 
persecution  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  had 
at  that  season  many  members  of  the  j 
Churches  in  Asia  Minor,  among  which 
the  Montanistic  movements  had  chiefly 
taken  place,  they  were  induced  thereby  [ 
to  take  a  lively  sympathy  in  these  cir-  I 


cumstances.  It  wrote  a  letter  to  Rome  to 
the  Bishop  Eleutheros,  and  the  Presbyter 
Irenseus  was  the  bearer  of  the  letter. 
Much  light  would  be  thrown  on  the 
transaction,  if  we  had  a  more  distinct  ac- 
count of  the  contents  of  this  letter,  but 
Eusebius*  says  merely,  that  their  judg- 
ment in  this  matter  was  very  pious  and 
orthodox.  Now,  as  Eusebius  decidedly 
looked  upon  the  Montanistic  views  as 
heretical,  we  may  conclude,  from  this 
expression,  that  the  judgment  delivered  in 
the  letter  was  against  the  Montanists. 
But  in  this  case  the  letter  could  not  have 
had  the  object  which  Eusebius  attributes 
to  it,  of  adjusting  the  controversies.  It 
suits  this  object  better,  to  suppose  that  in 
this  letter  the  prevalent  sentiment  was 
a  spirit  of  Christian  moderation,  which 
endeavoured  to  lower  the  importance  of 
the  difierences,  to  rebut  many  exagge- 
rated accusations  against  the  Montanistic 
Churches,  and  also  to  maintain  Christian 
unity  while  they  diflered  in  their  estimation 
of  the  value  of  the  new  prophetic  gifts.  If 
we  suppose  this,  it  can  easily  be  explained 
how  Eusebius  came  to  pass  so  favourable 
a  judgment  on  the  contents  of  the  letter, 
which  could  not  have  happened,  if  the 
letter  had  spoken  a  fZeciVZed/j/ Montanistic 
language.  This  coincides  best  also  with 
the  character  of  Irenaeus,  which  we  know 
to  have  been  peaceful  and  moderate,  as 
well  as  with  his  habits  of  thought,  which, 
though  by  no  means  decidedly  Monta- 
nistic, were  not  so  entirely  opposed  to 
the  Montanists.  Eleutheros  was  probably 
induced  by  this  ambassage  to  conclude  on 
terms  of  peace  with  those  Churches,  but 
afterwards  there  came  from  Asia  Minor 
to  Rome  a  violent  opponent  of  Montan- 
ism, named  Praxeas,  and  he  induced  the 
Roman  bishop,  partly  by  representing  to 
him  the  opposite  conduct  of  his  two  pre- 
decessors, Anicetus  and  Soter,  and  partly 
by  prejudicial  representations  of  the  con- 
dition of  the  Montanistic  Churches,  to 
revoke  all  that  he  had  done.  The  Mon- 
tanists now  propagated  themselves  as  a 
schismatical  party  [literally^  a  separated 
Church  party :)  they  were  called  Cata- 
phri/glans,  from  the  country  of  their 
origin,  and  also  Pepuzians,  because  Mon- 
tanus  taught  that  a  place  called  Pepiiza,  in 
Phrygia,  whicii  was,  perhaps,  the  first 
locality  of  a  ]\Iontanistic  Church,  was 
selected  as  tlie  spot  from  which  the  Mil- 
lenarian  kingtlom  of  Christ  was  to  pro- 
ceed. 

•  Lib.  V.  c.  3. 


336 


We  must  distinguish  between  the 
moderate  and  the  violent  opponents  of 
Montanism,  who  carried  their  opposition 
against  it  to  the  very  highest  pitch.  There 
were  some  who,  in  their  opposition  to  it, 
not  only  condemned  all  Chiliasm  as 
sometliing  altogether  unchristian,  and  as 
one  of  the  unchristian  doctrines  which 
proceeded  from  the  detested  Cerinthus, 
but  also  maintained  that  the  gifts  of  pro- 
phecy, to  which  the  Montanists  attached 
so  great  importance,  were  altogether 
foreign  to  the  Christian  economy,  inas- 
much as  the  line  of  the  prophets  had  ne- 
cessarily been  closed  by  John  the  Baptist, 
after  wliom,  the  end  and  aim  of  all  pro- 
phecy had  appeared.  The  words,  that 
the  Law  and  the  Prophets  should  only 
last  till  John,  (Matt.  xi.  13.)*  were  for 
ever  in  their  mouths ;  and  certainly  they 
were  thus  far  in  the  right,  that  prophecy 
in  the  economy  of  the  New  Testament 
cannot  be  looked  upon  as  something  es- 
sential and  necessarUy  belonging  to  the 
development  of  the  whole,  and  that  by 
the  prophetic  office  of  Christ  every  other 
prophetic  office  is  altogether  done  away 
with  as  a  necessary  means  for  the  forma- 
tion and  maintenance  of  the  Church. 
They,  therefore,  declared  the  Apocalypse, 
■with  which  the  Montanists  occupied 
themselves  a  great  deal,  and  from  which 
they  endeavoured  to  demonstrate  the  truth 
of  their  Chiliasm,  to  be  a  spurious  book, 
forged  by  Cerinthus,  which  was  at  vari- 
ance with  the  very  nature  of  the  Christian 
economy.  They  also  considered  the  first 
season  of  the  foundation  of  the  Church, 
the  time  of  the  apostles,  as  the  limit  of 
tliose  especial  and  extraordinary  opera- 
tions of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  gifts  of 
grace.  To  the  one-sided  state  of  feeling 
predominant  among  the  Montanists,  these 
overwrought  opponents  of  Montanism 
opposed  a  predominant  one-sided  and  cold 
state  of  mind,  dericient  in  warmth  of  in- 
ward Christian  feelings  ;  and  in  virtue  of 
this  they  rejected  much  which  was  of  a 
genuine  Christian  character,  from  too 
great  fear  of  falling  into  something  mys- 
tical.! But  this  last  disposition  was  too 
strange    to    the  prevailing   spirit  of  the 


THE    OPPONENTS    OF   MONTANISM. 


•  Tertullian  makes  frequent  allusion  to  this 
watchword  of  the  anlimontanistic  party  ;  but  wc 
must  confess  that  it  would  not  be  used  by  all  in 
the  same  sense  :  many  would  intend  by  it  only  in 
a  general  way  to  oppose  that  iritermixtureof  Law 
and  Gosi)el,  of  that  which  lielongs  to  the  Old  with 
that  which  belongs  to  the  New  Testament,  which 
they  found  in  Montanism. 

■j-  See  the  account  of  the  Alogi,  given  hereafter. 


Christian  Church,  in  its  youthful  life,  to 
allow  of  its  finding  much  acceptance. 

The  second  jninc'ipal  direction  of  the 
theological  spirit  proceeded  from  the 
school  of  Alexandria.  The  peculiar  spi- 
ritual life  in  this  city,  then  of  so  great 
importance  as  a  middle  point  of  union  be- 
tween the  East  and  the  West,  communi- 
catid  then,  as  it  had  done  formerly  to  the 
Jewish,  a  peculiar  character  to  the  Chris- 
tian theology,  which  formed  itself  there. 
The  Christian  theology  which  proceeded 
from  Alexandria,  bore  the  same  relation 
to  the  different  directions  of  tlie  Christian 
religious  and  theological  spirit,  that  the 
Jewish-Alexandrian  theology  had  borne 
to  the  different  directions  of  the  Jewish 
religious  and  theological  spirit.*  But  a 
pecidiar  institution  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church  had  an  especial  influence  on  the 
formation  of  this  Christian-Alexandrian 
theology,  I  mean  tlie  Jilexandrian  Cate- 
chetical School,  about  the  early  rise  of 
which,  however,  and  its  gradual  comple- 
tion, we  are  without  authentic  informa- 
tion. It  is  natural  to  inquire,  whether  the 
original  destination  of  this  school  was 
merely  to  give  instruction  to  those  hea- 
tliens  who  were  converted  to  Christianity, 
or  who  desired  to  become  better  ac- 
quainted with  it,  or  whether  a  sort  of 
school  for  the  education  of  Christian 
ministers,  a  kind  of  spiritual  theological 
seminary,  existed  there  from  the  very 
first.  The  accounts  of  Eusebiusf  and  Je- 
romej  are  too  indefinite  to  decide  this 
inquiry ;  and,  indeed,  both  these  fathers 
were  scarcely  in  a  condition  to  be  able  to 
distinguish  accurately  between  the  state 
of  this  school  in  their  oion  days  and  that 


*  See  p.  29. 

I  Lib.  vi.  c.  10.  It  appears  that  from  ancient 
times  there  had  existed  there  a  StSxtnt^Kuov  ngcoi 
ytjKuv,  which  would,  according  to  the  ecclesiastical 
usage  of  terms,  most  naturally  be  explained  as 
"a  School  for  the  interpretation  of  Scripture,"  and 
this  is  certainly  insuflicient  to  determine  the  nature 
and  kind  of  the  Alexandrian  School ;  but  when 
once  one  is  acquainted  with  the  nature  and  charac- 
ter of  that  school,  these  words  may  be  made  to 
contain  all  that  belongs  to  its  theological  studies. 
For  its  Gnosis  was  intended  to  give  tli«  key  to  the 
proper  understanding  of  Scripture,  and  would  be 
deduced  out  of  Scripture  by  allegorical  interpreta- 
tion. We  cannot,  in  this  age  of  the  Church, 
which  as  yet  jumbled  every  thing  together  in  a 
chaotic  fashion,  expect  to  find  any  division  of 
theological  discipline  into  various  classes,  such  as 
Exegesis,  (hgmutics,  S^c,  as  Professor  Hassellwch 
of  Stettin  has  justly  observed,  in  the  explanation 
of  these  words  in  his  treatise,  "de  Schola,  quaj 
Alexandria  floruit,  Catechetica,  Particul.  i.  p.  15." 

\  De  Viris  Illustr.  c.  36. 


REQUISITES  FOR   A    CATECHIST. 


337 


which  it  had  originally.  We  must,  there- 
fore, confine  ourselves  to  the  considera- 
tion of  that  which  is  known  of  the  opera- 
tions of  individual  catechists,  as  presidents 
of  this  school,  in  order  thence  to  gather 
some  conclusions  as  to  the  general  cir- 
cumstances of  the  school  itself.  We  find, 
then,  originally  at  Alexandria  only  one 
person  appointed  as  a  catechist  by  the 
bishop,  whose  business  it  was  to  com- 
municate religious  instruction  to  the  hea- 
tlicns,  as  well  as  to  instruct  the  children 
of  the  Christians  of  the  place  in  their 
religion  also*  Origen  was  the  first  who, 
as  catechist,  divided  with  another  person 
the  duties  of  his  calling,  which  had  be- 
come too  much  for  him,  while  he  was 
desirous  of  prosecuting  at  the  same  time 
his  learned  labours  in  theology  ;  and  on 
that  account  he  formed  his  catechumens 
into  two  classes.  But  although  in  other 
})laces  the  catechist  might  not  need  to 
possess  very  high  spiritual  qualities  and 
peculiar  knowledge,  the  case  was  different 
in  Alexandria,  wliere  they  often  had  to 
instruct  men  of  a  literary  and  philoso- 
phical cast  of  mind,  who  had  already  inves- 
tigated a  variety  of  systems,  in  order  to 
find  out  a  system  of  religious  truth  adapted 
to  their  wants,  and  where  they  were  often 
obliged  to  converse  with  such  men  on  re- 
ligious subjects,  and  philosopiiical  matters 
which  are  connected  with  them. 

In  that  place  men  were  required  who 
possessed  a  learned  acquaintance  with  the 
Hellenic  religion,  and  the  philosophical 
systems  then  peculiarly  in  vogue  in  the 
educated  classes,  among  which  the  Plato- 
nic-eclectic was  chiefly  predominant,  and 
■who  would  thence  be  in  a  condition  to 
set  forth  the  insufficiency  of  these  things 
to  meet  the  religious  requirements  of  the 
heathens;  to  counteract  the  prejudices 
against  Christianity  which  arose  out  of 
their  philosophical  habits  of  thought,  in  a 
manner  suitable  to  them ;  to  compare 
Christianity  with  the  prevalent  religious 
and  philosophical  systems ;  to  seek 
and  to  point  out  the  part  of  their  phi- 
losophically-developed religious  know- 
ledge,! on  which  Christianity  might  be 
engrafted ;  and  generally  to  set  before 
them  the  Christian  doctrines  in  a  manner 
suited  to  their  learning  and  cultivation  of 
mind.  It  was  not  sufficient  here,  as  it 
was  in  other  Churches,  to  bring  forward 
the  main  doctrines  of  Christianity,  accord- 


•  Eiisebius  says,  lib.  vi.  c.  5,  that  Origen,  when 
a  boy,  had  been  the  scholar  of  Clement. 

■\  Bewusstseyn  consciousness  or  knowledge  ; 
is  the  word  in  the  German. — H.  J.  R.] 
43 


ing  to  the  so-called  9ra^a^c/o-»ci  but  it  was 
necessary  with  the  better  informed  cate- 
chumens to  trace  things  up  to  the  original 
source  of  religion  in  Scripture  itsell',  and 
to  endeavour  to  lead  them  to  the  under- 
standing of  Scripture ;  they  desired  a 
creed  which  would  bear  a  learned  and 
enlightened  investigation.  One  of  these 
very  catechists,  Clement  gives  a  hint  of 
what  is  required  for  the  successful  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  the  catechist  office, 
when  he  says  :*  "  lie  who  desires  gen- 
erally to  select  that  which  is  useful  for 
the  advantage  of  the  catechumens,  and 
more  especially  when  there  are  Helle- 
nists,! (but  the  earth  is  the  Lord's  and  all 
that  therein  is,)  he  must  not,  like  the 
beasts  devoid  of  reason,  refuse  to  leara 
much ;  but  he  must  seek  to  gather  to- 
gether as  many  aids  as  possible  for  his 
hearers."  He  shortly  afterwards  adds.J 
"  All  cultivation  is  useful,  and  especially 
the  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  neces- 
sary, in  order  to  be  able  to  prove  that 
which  we  bring  forward,  and  also,  where 
the  auditors  are  persons  of  Hellenic  edu- 
cation."§  It  was,  therefore,  necessary  that 
great  care  should  be  used  in  the  choice 
of  these  Alexandrian  catechists,  and  the 
office  was  assigned  to  men  of  literary  and 
philosophical  attainments,  who  liad  them- 
selves come  over  to  Christianity  after  a 
learned  investigation  of  it,  such  as  Pan- 
tajnus  iuavrxivoq)  who  is  the  first  Alex- 
andrian catechist,  who  is  known  to  us ; 
and  such  also  his  disciple  Clement. 

Now,  as  these  men  formed  the  suc- 
cessors to  their  office  out  of  the  circle  of 
their  scholars  among  the  converted  Hea- 
thens, and  as  many  of  their  scholars,  in- 
cited by  their  lectures  and  conversation, 
devoted  their  learning,  as  well  as  all  they 
had  besides,  only  to  the  service  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  became  afterwards  zealous 
ministers  of  the  Church,  and  as  many 
young  Christians  also  joined  them  and 
endeavoured  to  attain  a  learned  well 
grounded  Christian  knowledge,  as  well 
as  an  aptitude  to  instil  the  same  into 
others,  it  happened  of  itself  without  en- 


•  Stromal,  lib.  vi.  6.59  B  [Pott.  785.  Sylb. 
279.     Klotz,  iii.  1.52.] 

!  We  may  thus  supply  what  is  requisite  to 
complete  the  sense :  he  need  not  fear  to  seek  even 
in  Heathen  literature  the  traces  of  truth,  and  ap- 
propriate to  himself  what  is  useful  there,  for  all 
comes  from  God,  and  as  such  is  pure. 

\  Strom,  vi.  CfiO  C. 

4  We  must  here  compare  tot^ether  generally, 
what  Clement  says  of  those  with  whom  the  faith 
must  receive 'a  demonstration  after  the  Hellenistic 
fashion. 

-       2F 


338 


WIDE    INFLUENCE    OP   THES^    SCHOOLS. 


deavours  for  that  object,  that  their  sphere 
of  exertion  enlarged  itself,  and  a  kind  of 
theological  school,  a  learned  seminary  for 
ministers  of  the  Church,  was  formed 
around  them. 

In  order  properly  to  understand  the  de- 
velopment of  the  peculiar  theological 
spirit  of  this  school,  we  must  fully  enter 
into  its  relations  with  regard  to  the  three 
different  parties,  in  connection  with  which, 
and  in  opposition  to  which,  it  was  form- 
ed, and  the  different  spiritual  dispositions 
of  which,  it  hoped  to  be  able  to  reconcile 
and  to  unite  together  by  means  of  a  higher 
principle,  which  would  smoothe  down  the 
contradictions  between  them. 

These  relations  were, 

1.  Their  relation  to  the  Greeks^  who 
sought  after  wisdom,  who  despised  Chris- 
tianity as  a  blind,  reason-hating  belief,  and 
who  were  only  strengthened  in  their  con- 
tempt of  it,  by  the  sensuous  conceptions 
of  the  uninformed  and  abruptly  repulsive 
Christians  by  which  they  were  met. 

2.  Their  relation  to  the  Gnostics,  then 
very  common  in  Alexandria,  who  at  the 
same  time  spoke  with  contempt  of  the 
blind  belief  of  the  sensuous  multitude,  and 
by  the  promise  of  a  higher  exoteric  reli- 
gious creed,  attracted  to  themselves  the 
Heathens  who  were  inquiring  after  wis- 
dom, and  the  Christians  who  were  un- 
satisfied with  the  common  instruction  in 
religion. 

3.  Their  relation  to  that  first  class  of 
pastors  of  the  Church,  whose  views  were 
of  a  Practical-realistic  natttre,  and  par- 
ticularly those  among  them  who  were 
very  zealous,  to  whom  from  the  specula- 
live  pride  and  presumption  of  the  Gnos- 
tics, all  speculation  and  pliilosophizing, 
and  every  attempt  at  any  thing  like  a 
Gnosis,  were  objects  of  suspicion,  and 
were  always  fearful  of  the  intermixture  of 
foreign  philosophical  elements  with  Chris- 
tianity. 

By  means  of  a  Gnosis,*  proceeding 
from  faith,  and  engrafting  itself  on  that 
faith  in  harmony  with  it,  the  Alexandrians 
expected  to  avoid  the  one-sided  and  false 
views  of  these  three  dispositions,  and  to 
appropriate  to  themselves  whatever  there 
was  of  truth  in  each  of  them,  nay,  even 
to  be  able  to  reconcile  them  to  each  other. 

In  their  theory  of  the  relation  of  yvua-K; 
to  7r*i7T»{  they  differed  from  theGnostics  in 
this  respect,that  they  recognised  ttio-ti?  as 
the  foundation  of  the  higher  life  for  all 
Christians,  as  the  common  bond,  by  which 

•  -yvug-is  dx»6«v»  opposed  to  the  ■^uimvuD;. 


all,  however  they  might  differ  from  each 
other  in  intellectual  culture,  might  be 
united  into  one  Divine  community.  They 
even  also  opposed  the  unity  of  the  Ca- 
tholic Church,  founded  on  this  faith,  to 
the  discrepancies  of  the  Gnostic  schools 
(.Jiar^i^ai,)  the  one  with  the  other,  and 
they  did  not  assume  different  sources  of 
knowledge  for  w»o-tk  and  yvuaK;,  but  the 
same  for  both  ;  namely,  the  tradition  of 
the  main  doctrines  of  Christianity,  exist- 
ing in  all  Churches,  and  Holy  Scripture ; 
they  ascribed  to  Gnosis  only  the  work, 
of  bringing  into  full  consciousness,  that 
which  was  first  acquired  by  faith  and  re- 
ceived into  the  inward  life,  of  developing 
it  according  to  its  full  extent  and  its  in- 
ternal connection,  of  grounding  it  upon 
knowledge,  and  presenting  it  to  others 
with  knowledge,  of  proving  that  this  is 
the  genuine  doctrine,  which  came  from 
Christ,  of  giving  a  reason  fi)r  it,  and  of 
defending  it  against  the  reproaches  of  its 
adversaries  among  the  heathen  philoso- 
phers and  heretics.  They  used  here  for 
their  motto  the  passage  of  Isaiah,  which 
appears  already  to  have  been  used  as  a 
motto  in  more  ancient  days,  and  which 
afterwards  was  the  motto  to  designate  the 
relation  between  faith  and  knowledge 
from  the  days  of  Augustine  to  those  of  the 
scholastic  theology  formed  upon  Augus- 
tine— the  passage  found  in  Isaiah  vii.  9. 
This  passage,  indeed,  if  taken  only  in  the 
Alexandrian  version,  and  without  refer- 
ence to  the  context,  may  bear  this  mean- 
ing :*  lav  fji.n  'TTiCTTtva-nrs,  ciiSi  fxri  crvvnn,  if 
ye  believe  not,  neither  will  you  attain  to 
knowledge — which  words  they  first  took 
in  this  sense :  whosoever  does  not  be- 
lieve in  the  Gospel,  cannot  attain  to  an 
insight  into  the  spirit  of  the  nature  of  the 
Old  Testament;  and  then  in  the  sense 
which  is  akin  to  it :  without  faith  in 
Christianity  man  cannot  penetrate  into 
the  deeper  knowledge  of  the  nature  of  the 
Christian  doctrines.J   Thus  Clement  says, 


*  Just  as  in  later  times,  many  passages  of  the 
translation  of  the  Bible  by  Luther  have  become 
current,  as  proofs,  for  some  proposition  which  had 
reference  to  Christian  faith,  or  Christian  Hfe, 
although  this  application  of  them  was  not  in  con- 
formity with  the  meaning  of  the  original. 

[How  often  c.  f'.  have  the  words,  "  Search  the 
Scriptures,"  been  cited  as  a  command,  by  persons 
who  (lid  not  dream  that  the  original  would  bear  a 
very  diflfercnt  sense,  '  Ye  search  the  Scriptures ;' 
and  that  some  distinguished  critics  have  main- 
tained that  the  latter  sense  is  the  more  appro- 
I)riatc.  See  Bp.  Jebb's  Sermon  on  tliis  text — 
H.  J.  R.] 

i  Stromat.  lib.  ii.  362  A  ;  lib.  i.  273  A  ;  lib.  iv. 


ALEXANDRIAN    IDEA    OF     FAITH. 


339 


"Faith  is  as  necessary  for  the  spiritual  | 
life  of  the  Gnostic,  as   breath  is   for  the! 
aninial  life."*  They  endeavoured  to  make  ! 
good  the   sabstantial  nature,  the  dignity  I 
and  power  of  Faith  against  the  heathen  { 
and   lieretics.     Clement  combats  the  no-  [ 
tion,  that  Faith  is  a  mere  arbitrary  opinion.  | 
Faith  with  him  is  a  free  apprehension  of 
the  Divine,  preceding  all  demonstration,! 
a  practical  assent,  in  virtue  of  the  feeling 
of  truth  implanted  in  the  nature  of  man, 
and  in  virtue  of  the  natural  disposition  to 
a  belief  in  the  truth  that  reveals  itself  to 
man  ;  unbelief  is,  therefore,  in  his  opinion, 
a  deficiency  on  the  part  of  man  jj  and  he 
says    in  another   passage,  '"  He  who  be- 
lieves on  the  Son,  has  eternal  life.     Since 
then,  the  believers  have  life,  what  higher 
thing  remains   for   them,  than    the    pos- 
session of  eternal  life  }     But  nothing  is 
deficient  in  Faith,  which  is  perfect   and 
self-sulncient  in  itself."§     Clement  here 
sets  forth  as  the  characteristic  of  Faith, 
that  it  brings  with  it  the  pledge  of  the  fu- 
ture, that  it  takes  beforehand  the  future 
as  a  present  possession. ||     How  a  deeper 
knowledge  of  that  which  is  believed  pro- 
ceeds, by  means  of  the  enlightenment  of 
the  reason,  from  a  Faith,  which  passes 
into  the  interior  life,  while  that  which  is 
believed    is  enacted   in  life  (lit.  becomes 
lived,)  is  beautifully  explained  by  Origen 
in  the  passage  quoted  above,ir  where  he 
says,  after  quoting  a  narrative   from  the 
Gospel,  "He   who   believes    and    under- 
stands  what  is  written  in  Isaiah  vii.  9, 
will  have  received  understanding,  from  his 
faith,   according  to  the  measure    of  his 
faith ;  and  when  he  has  received  this,  let 
him  say  what  he  has  a  right  to  say  after 
the  foundation  of  his  faith,  in  the  spirit  of  j 
his  faith,  in  the  spirit  of  these  words  :  / 
believe, a7id therefore, I speak^'Ps.cw'i.  10;  ' 
Rom.  X.  10.**     Let  such  an  one  believe  ] 
1 

52S  B;  and  Origenea  in  Matt.  Ed.  Hue!,  p.  424.]  j 
[The  passages  of  Clemens  are  in  Pott.  p.  432.  I 
320,  625;  in  Sylb.  156,  117,  226.]  j 

•  Stromal,  lib.  ii  373. 

■]■  n^'AJi^'f  eu'j.i'ajwii'sc  Tre'.KrtTi.Kyi-^tst^. — Stromal.  | 
lib.  ii.  371.    [Pott '444.  S^lb.  1.59.]  1 

%  Stromal,  lib.  ii.  3S4.     [Poll.  459.  Sylb.  165.] 

§  PffidaRog.  lib.  i.  c  6. 

U  'oMio  it  TO  (tm)  JT/iTTa/s-*/  y.i»  5r§cBX;)4>oT£f  fflf;- 
f^iKt,  //tTi  rut  i..M%T'rt.in  i-mK'J.fjL&avoui!)  ytvofjtiv.v. 

Ii  Compare  also  Stromal,  vii.  731.  [Pott.  864. 
Sylb.  310.]  Faith  is  a  good  indwelling  in  the 
soul  (ivh-jbiT'.v  Ti  [ti]  (S^^Soc)  while  it  acknow- 
ledges God,  and  values  Him,  without  an  effort,  and 
therefore,  must  man,  proceeding  from  this  faith,  and 
increasing  in  it  by  the  grace  of  God  attain  as  far  as 
possible  the  kingdom  of  him  (God.) 

*  •  These  words  also  are  not  used  properly,  ac 


not  merely  in  Jesus,  and  on  that  which 
is  written  in  this  place,  but  let  him  re- 
cognise the  sense  that  is  included  in  it ; 
for  he  who  remains  in  the  truth  of  faith, 
and  lives  in  the  word  by  works  corres- 
ponding to  the  word,  learns  the  truth,  as 
Jesus  promised,  and  is  made  free  by  the 
truth."  What  Clement  also  says  about 
the  new  powers  of  perception  for  Divine, 
things  proceeding  from  this  inward  life  of 
faith,  is  beautiful  :  "  See,  says  the  Logos, 
(Isaiah  xliii.  9,)  I  will  make  a  new  thing, 
which  no  eye  hath  seen,  and  no  ear  hath 
heard,  and  hath  not  entered  into  the  heart 
of  any  man,  1  Cor.  ii.  9.  Which  may  be 
beheld,  received,  and  comprehended  with 
a  new  eye,  with  a  new  ear,  with  a  new 
heart,  by  faith  and  understanding,  in  as 
much  as  the  disciples  of  the  Lord  speak, 
understand,  and  act  spiritually."* 

This  is  exactly  the  peculiar  Christian 
feature  in  this  Alexandrian  theory,  that 
they  do  not  conceive  Gnosis  to  be  a  matter 
of  mere  speculation,  but  as  something 
proceeding  from  a  new  inward  living 
power,  produced  by  faith,  and  shown  in 
conduct,  as  a  habifus  practicus  animi ;  and 
thus  Clement  says  :t  "  As  the  doctrines, 
so  must  the  conduct  also  be,  for  the  tree 
is  known  by  the  fruits,  not  by  the  blos- 
soms and  leaves,  and  Gnosis  comes  also 
from  the  fruits  and  the  conduct,  not  from 
the  doctrine  and  the  blossoms :  for  we 
say  that  Gnosis  is  not  only  doctrine,  but 
a  Divine  knowledge,  that  light,  which 
arises  in  the  soul  out  of  obedience  to  the 
commandment,  which  makes  all  things 
clear,  and  teaches  man  to  know  what 
there  is  in  creation  and  himself,  and  how 
he  can  stand  in  communion  with  God, 
for  what  the  eye  is  to  the  body,  that 
Gnosis  is  in  the  soul."  No  knowledge 
of  Divine  things  can  exist,  without  a  life 
in  them,  which  comes  from  Aiith ;  here 
knotolcdge  and  life  become  one.'''''^ 

cording  to  the  Alexandrian  version,  and  in  con- 
formity with  the  context;  but  the  sense  which 
Origen  attaches  lo  them,  and  the  theory  built 
upon  them,  are  clear;  all  deeper  dcvelopmcnl 
of  the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture,  or  of  the  doc- 
trines of  the  faith,  must  proceed  from  a  life  in 
faith. 

•  Clem.  Stromal,  lib.  ii.  365  B.  [Pott.  436. 
Sylb..  136.] 

f  Stromal,  lib.  iii.  444.  [Poll.  531.   Sylb.  191.] 

i  Clem.  Stromal,  lib.  iv.  490 :  ic  jumin  imr- 
TUfxnY  iX^'-v  **'  •yvwri/  KiKTxr^Ai  (t:v  yvarriicov)  hrlT- 
T«w;iv  Jf  fimt  X.XI  ywTii.     [Pott.  581.  Sylb.  210.] 

He  might  certainly  have  obtained  this  idea  from 
what  the  i\co-Platonic  philosophy  which  is  older 
than  Plolinus,  taught,  concerning  the  identity  of 
subject  and  olijcd  in  the  case  of  the  highest  con- 


OBJECTIVE    SOURCES    OF   KNOWLEDGE. 


340 

This  is,  therefore,  in  the  Alexandrian 
theory,  the  subjective  condition  and  the 
subjective  nature  of  Gnosis  •,  as  far  as 
regards  the  objective  sources  of  know- 
ledge, from  which  tlie  '  Gnostikos'  was  to 
endeavour  constantly  to  learn  Avith  greater 
clearness  and  depth  the  truths  received 
through  faith  by  him  into  his  inward  life  : 
these  were,  according  to  Clement — the 
Holy  Scriptures.  Although  many  who 
Avere  deficient  in  the  education  requisite 
for  the  purpose  of  investigating  Scripture 
for  themselves,  only  held  fast  the  essen- 
tial fundamental  truths,  which  had  been 
communicated  to  them  at  their  first  in- 
struction, in  accordance  with  tradition  ; 
the  Gnostikos  was  to  distinguish  himself 
from  tlie  common  race  of  believers,  by 
proving  these  truths  by  a  comparison  of 
Scripture  with  itself,  and  supplying  all 
that- was  needful  to  them,  by  knowing 
how  to  combat  from  the  same  Scriptures 
the  errors  which  opposed  them,  and  thus 
a  fiiith  grounded  on  much  Biblical  know- 
ledge, was  in  his  case  to  take  the  place 
of  a  belief  on  the  authority  of  the  Church. 
Clement  uses  the  following  language:* 
"  Faith  is,  then,  the  shortly-expressed 
knowledge  of  that  which  is  essential,  but 
Gnosis  is  the  strong  and  firm  demonstra- 
tion of  the  things  received  by  faith, 
grounded  on  faith  by  means  of  the  teach- 
ing of  our  Lord,  by  which  faith  is  raised  to 
an  enlightened  belief  not  to  be  shaken."! 
And,  in  opposing  the  proofs  grounded  on 
the  undeceiving  touchstone  of  Scripture 
to  the  reproach  of  the  Heathens  and  Jews, 
that  it  is  impossible,  from  the  many  sects 
among  the  Christians  to  know  where 
truth  may  be  found  ;  the  same  writer  says, 
"  We  do  not  confide  on  men,  who  only 
proclaim  their  own  judgment,  to  whom 


we  might,  in  like  manner,  oppose  our 
own  judgment.  But  since  it  is  not 
enough,  merely  to  express  our  own 
opinion,  but  we  must  support  what  we 
say,  we  do  not  wait  for  the  witness  of 
men,  but  we  support  what  we  say,  by  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  which  is  the  most 
worthy  of  confidence  of  all  modes  of 
proof,  or  rather  which  is  the  only  one, 
by  the  knowledge  of  which,  those  who 
have  only  just  tasted  the  Scriptures,  are 
Believers — those  who  have  gone  farther 
and  are  more  accurately  acquainted  with 
the  truth,  are  '  GnosticsP* 

Hence  Clement  calls  the  Gnosjs,  which 
proceeds  from  a  comparison  of  different 
passages  of  Scripture  with  one  another, 
and  developes  the  consequences  which 
flow  from  the  recognised  doctrines  of 
faith,  a  faith  according  to  knowledge 
(literally,  a  knowing  faith.)"f  With  him, 
therefore,  the  Gnostic  is  one,  who  has 
grown  gray  in  the  study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  whose  life  is  nothing  else 
than  works  and  words,  which  correspond 
to  the  Divine  truths  received  tradition- 
ally.! But  it  is  only  to  the  Gnostic  that 
the  Holy  Scripture  brings  such  a  know- 
ledge of  Divine  things,  because  it  is  he 
only,  who  brings  to  it  a  believing  sense 
(or  capacity) — a  sense  capable  of  receiv- 
ing that  which  is  Divine.  Where  a  man 
wants  this  sense,  Scripture  appears  un- 
fruitful.§  This  inward  sense  is,  neverthe- 
less, not  sufficient  to  deduce  out  of  the 
Scriptures  the  truths  contained  in  them, 
to  develope  their  whole  extent,  and  to 
unite  them  into  a  systematized  whole,  so 
as  to  defend  them  against  Heathens  and 
Heretics,  and  to  apply  them  to  all  which 
had  hitherto  been  objects  of  human 
knowledge.  For  this  there  was  needed 
a  previous  learned  preparation,  and  such 
tlition  of  intuitive  perception;  but  he  might  have  j  could  not  have  been  created  anew  at  once 


drawn  the  thing  itself  from  his  inward  Christian 
experience  and  conceptions,  without  our  assuming 
any  other  hypothesis  to  explain  the  circumstance, 
and  he  need  not  be  sujjposcd  to  have  borrowed 
any  thing  from  the  Neo-Platonic  philosophy,  ex- 
cept \\\c  form  in  which  ho  represented  his  notions. 
And  besides,  since  the  inflvience  of  spiritual  phe- 
nomena,'which  lay  hold  deeply  of  the  life  of  their 
age.  extends  far  wider  than  is  immediately  per- 
ceptible, and  cannot  be  mechanically  reckoned, 
who  can  determine  how  far  Christianity  had 
already  influenced  the  spiritual  atmosphere,  in 
which  certain  ideas  became  current  ? 

*   Stromat.  vii.  732.  [Pott.  865-6.  Sylb.  311.] 

■j"  'H  /JtiV  Ot/V  TTKrTIi  O'UVTC/L/.Oi  iCTIV,  w;  ITTC;  itTTilV,  TOSV 

Tria-Tiui;  ?rctpiK>ifj'jUivci)V  itr^f^st  kui  li'-^stio;,  iiA  rut 
nv^iaMn;  SiS^ta-KctKia.?  iTroiK'JofMufx&ni  tji  Tria-Tii,  tU  to 
ujUiraTTTCd'Tcv  KUt  /AcT  iTrfnuy.))^  Kcira.M7rnv  7raea.7ri^- 
r:ucTa. 


by  Christianity ;  but  Christianity  was 
obliged  to  engraft  itself  here  on  the  class 
of  learning  and  cultivation  of  mind  here 
in  vogue,  just  as  it  had  grown  up  into 
existence  and  was  ready  for  it,  in  order 
that  Christianity,  as  the  leaven  for  all 
niankind,||  might  by  degrees  penetrate  it. 


•   Stromal,  vii.  757,  [Pott.  891.  Sylb.  322.] 
j-  ew/a-TXjMcvww  miTK.    Stromat.  ii.  381.    [Pott. 
454.    Sylb.  164.] 

\  Stromat.  vii.  762-3.    [Pott.  896,  Sylb,  323.] 
§  Stromat,  vii,  756,  tc/c  yvma-rix-on  K&iviiKoia-tv  ai 
yg-x<pcti. 

II  Clement  has  beautifully  alluded  to  this  pa- 
rable of  the  leaven,  "  The  power  of  the  word, 
given  to  us,  which  does  much  with  small  means, 
which  attracts  every  one,  who  receives  it  unto 
him,  to  itself  in  a  secret  and  invisible  manner, 


RELATION    OF    PHILOSOPHY   TO    CHRISTIANITY. 


341 


and  give  its  own  peculiar  turn   to  this 
cultivation  of  mind. 

The  Alexandrian  Gnosis  by  this,  now 
attracted  to  itself  a  multitude  of  re- 
proaches from  the  other  party,  which 
compelled  it  thoroughly  to  justify  its 
method  of  proceeding.  This  content, 
which  has  often  been  repeated  in  history, 
is  au  interesting  one.  It  was  objected  to 
the  Alexandrian  party,  that  the  prophets 
and  apostles  had  no  philosophical  educa- 
tion and  attainments.  Clement  answered, 
"The  apostles  and  prophets  spoke  cer- 
tainly as  disciples  of  the  Spirit,  what  it 
inspired  them  to  say ;  but  we  cannot 
reckon  on  a  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
that  stands  in  the  place  of  all  human 
means  of  information,  in  order  to  unravel 
the  hidden  sense  of  their  words.  The 
training  of  the  mind  by  learning,  must 
make  us  capable  of  developing  the  whole 
intention  of  the  sense  communicated  to 
them  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
He  who  wishes  to  become  enlightened  in 
his  thought  by  the  power  of  God,  must 
already  be  accustomed  to  philosophize  on 
spiritual  matters ;  he  must  already  have 
attained  for  himself  the  proper  frame  of 
thought,  which  may  be  then  illuminated 
by  a  higher  Spirit.  He  needs  a  dialectic 
education  of  the  mind,  in  order  to  be  able 
sufficiently  lo  distinguish  the  ambiguous 
and  synonymous  terms  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture."* Against  those  who  maintain  that 
man  ought  to  content  himself  with  faith, 
and  who  cast  away  all  the  knowledge, 
which  men  wish  to  use  in  the  service  of 
faith,  he  says — "  As  if,  without  even  using 
any  care  towards  the  culture  of  the  vine, 
they  expected  at  once  to  obtain  the  grapes. 
The  Lord  is  represented  to  us  under  the 
image  of  a  vine,  from  whom  we  must 
harvest  fruit  with  the  reasonable  careful- 
ness and  the  skill  of  the  husbandman. 
He  must  cut,  dig,  bind  up,  and  do  every 
thing  of  that  kind,  he  needs  the  hook, 
the  axe,  and  other  tools  of  husbandry  for 
the  care  of  the  Vine,  in  order  that  it  may 
preserve  fruit  that  we  may  enjoy."t  He 
had    to    defend    the  Alexandrian  Gnosis 


and  conducts  his  whole  nature  to  an  unity  (lite- 
rally, a  oneness.")  >i  iV;^;ac  t-.u  Xoycv,  i  i-.bua-n  M/un, 
av/TojUH  o-jo-u.  x.*i  /uvxT<  rxvrx  rev  <A^a^Eyiv  Km  tiJTic 

tai/TCU  KTHTHUtJCV  sti/TilV,  ITIKU^Vf/LfjlUw:  T«  ICXI  aOMCUi: 
3-gi?  iXUTHV  tKKit  KXl  TO  TU-V  atx/nu  TUVrHfAU.  UC  tVCTHT* 

iruvctyfi.  Strornat.  lib.  v.  p.  587.  [Pott.  694. 
Sylh.  249.] 

*  Strornat.  i.  292.  [Pott.  342.  Sylb.  126. 
N.  B.  This  passage  is  not  exactly  translated  from 
Clement,  l)ut  paraphrased  and  a  little  altered. — H. 
J.  R.] 

t  L.  cp.  291. 


against  the  reproach,  that  Divine  revela- 
tion is  not  allowed  to  be  the  self-sullicing 
source  of  truth ;  that  it  is  made  to  need 
completion  and  support  from  foreign 
sources ;  and  that  those  who  are  not  well 
informed  and  highly  educated,  are  ex- 
cluded from  a  knowledge  of  it.  He  says 
in  reply* — "  If  we  are  to  make  a  distinc- 
tion of  those,  who  are  always  ready  to 
complain,  we  should  call  philosophy 
.something,  which  co-operates  towards 
the  knowledge  of  truth  :  an  endeavour 
after  truth — a  preparatory  training  of  the 
Gnostic,  and  we  do  not  make  the  co- 
operating principle  the  original  cause,  nor 
the  chief.  Not  as  if  that  last  could  not 
exist  without  philosophy,  for  certainly  all 
of  us,  without  a  general  and  encyclopee- 
dical  instruction,!  and  without  the  Hel- 
lenic philosophy,  but  many  also,  even 
without  being  able  to  read  and  write,  being 
laid  hold  of  by  the  Divine  pliilosophy, 
which  comes  from  tlie  barbarians,  have 
received  by  the  power  of  God  through 
faith,  the  doctrine  concerning  the  being 
and  attributes  of  God,  {literally,  tlie  doc- 
trine about  God.)  The  doctrine  also  of 
our  Saviour  is  perfect  in  itself  and  self- 
sufficing,  as  the  power  and  wisdom  of 
God;  but  the  Hellenic  philosophy  which 
is  added  to  it,  does  not  make  the  truth 
more  powerful,  it  only  renders  inelTectual 
the  sophistical  attacks  against  it ;  and  as 
it  wards  off  delusive  machinations  against 
the  truth,  it  is  called  ttie  proper  ward  and 
fence  of  the  vineyard.^  The  truth  of  the 
faith  is  as  it  were  the  bread  neces.sary  for 
life;  the  form  under  which  it  is  represented 
to  us,  is  to  be  compared  with  that  wiiich 
is  eaten  with  the  bread,  and  is  like  the 
dessert." 

While,  on  the  whole,  Clement  is  dis- 
tinguished by  the  mildness  and  modera- 
tion with  which  he  opposed  the  adversa- 
ries of  the  Alexandrian  Gnosis,  he  himself 
was  well  aware  how  much  their  anxiety 
was  awakened  by  the  adulterations  of 
simple  Christianity  among  so  many  sects, 
who  mixed  with  the  Gospel,  elements  the 
most  uncongenial  to  its  nature;  and  he 
well  knew,  also,  how  natural  it  is  for 
men  to  confound  the  abuse  and  the  right 
use  of  the  same  thing  with  each  other. 
The   zeal,  however,  of  his    adversaries. 


•   Strornat.  i.  318.    [Pott  376.     Sylb.  138.) 

j"  aiBJ  T)lf  eyx.vKKl'.u  TTAiSuxi;. 

%   What  the  ancients  said  generally  of  Dialer- 
tics  in  relation  to  philosophy,  t1i;it  thoy  were  its 
fence,  was  applied  by  the  Alexandrians  to  the  re- 
lation of  philosophy  itself  to  the  Christian  Gnositi. 
2f2 


DEFENCE    OF   THE    STUDY    OF    PHILOSOPHY. 


342 


which  was  certainly  often  a  blind  zeal, 
and  the  persuasion  that  this  too  sensuous, 
and  one-sided  disposition  stood  much  in 
the  way  of  the  Spirit  of  Christianity, 
which  endeavoured  to  ennoble  all  human 
things,  and  that  many  were  tliereby  de- 
terred from  Christianity,  led  him  to  speak 
somewhat  too  sharply  against  their  oppo- 
nents, and  did  not  suffer  him  to  do  be- 
coming justice  to  their  pious  zeal,  as 
when  he  says,*  "  It  is  not  unknown  to 
me,  what  many  ignorant  and  clamorous 
persons!  constantly  say,  that  our  faith 
must  confine  itself  to  the  most  necessary 
and  essential  points,  and  must  let  go  all 
foreign  and  superfluous  matters,  whereby 
we  are  detained  with  things  that  do  not 
contribute  towards  our  object."  And  in 
another  passage^  where  he  says :  "  The 
multitude  in  their  anxiety  lest  they  should 
be  carried  away  by  the  Hellenic  philoso- 
phy,§  dread  it,  as  children  dread  masks. 
But  i^  their  faith  is  of  such  a  kind  (for  I 
cannot  call  that  knowledge)  as  to  be  over- 
turned by  plausible  discourses,  then  it 
may  just  as  well  be  overturned,  in  regard 
to  these  people,  for  they  themselves  con- 
fess, that  they  have  not  the  truth ;  for  the 
truth  cannot  be  overturned,  false  opinions 
may."  Now  this  is  dealing  out  a  hard 
and  unjust  sentence,  if  we  refer  it  to  per- 
sons ;  for  all  worth  was  not  to  be  denied 
to  the  faith  of  these  persons,  although 
they  did  not  feel  confidence  in  their  own 
ability,  to  enter  into  a  contest  with  a 
spirit  of  understanding  prejudiced  against 
the  faith,  and  although  they  were  afraid 
of  being  constantly  disquieted  in  the  en- 
joyment of  that,  which  was  to  them  their 
dearest  possession.  But  if  we  look  at  it 
objectively  it  is  a  great  and  an  instructive 
truth  for  all  ages,  which  the  free  spirit  of 
Clement  here  proclaimed ;  that  Christianity 
need  fear  nothing  from  any  opposition,  but 
that  the  truth,  when  placed  in  opposition 
to  that  which  is  false,  only  shines  forth 
the  brighter.  In  conformity  with  that 
declaration,  which  is  ascribed  to  our 
Saviour  in  the  Apocryphal  Gospels  yima^B 
oGxt/i/oi  Tg«7r5^tT«»  (be  ye  skilful  money- 

•   Stromat.  i.  278.    [Pott.  326.    Sylb.  120.] 

I   u/j.'j.BcDC  -^'^(fa'Sili. 

^   vi.  fi.5.5.     [Pott.  780.    Sylb.  278.] 

§  In  Stromat.  vi.  G.59,  Clement,  in  a  manner 
full  of  Kpirit,  says:  "Most  Christians  handle  the 
doctrines  after  a  clownish  manner,  like  the  com- 
panions of  Ulysses,  who  got  out  of  the  way,  not  of 
the  Sirens,  but  of  their  music  and  song,  by  shut- 
ting their  ears  out  of  ignorance;  because  they 
knew,  that  if  they  have  once  given  their  ear  to  the 
Hellenistic  knowledge,  there  is  no  chance  of  their 
turning  again  from  them."     [See  p.  337.] 


changers,)  the  Gnosticos,  according  to 
Clement,  ought  to  be  able  universally  to 
distinguish  mere  appearances  from  the 
truth,  as  he  would  false  money  from 
genuine ;  and  hence,  to  fear  no  might  of 
false  appearances.  He  needed  an  acquaint- 
ance with  the  Grecian  philosophy,  just  to 
be  able  to  point  out  to  the  philosophically 
educated  heathens,  its  errors  and  unsatis- 
factoriness,  to  battle  with  them  on  their 
own  ground,  and  thence  to  lead  them  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  Clement 
says* — "  Thus  much  1  say  to  those  who 
are  desirous  of  finding  fault,  that  even  if 
philosophy  be  useless,  yet  the  study  of  it 
is  useful,  because  it  is  useful  fully  to  prove 
that  it  (philosophy)  is  useless.  For  we 
cannot  condemn  the  Heathens  by  a  mere 
prejudice  against  their  doctrines,  unless 
we  go  into  the  development  of  particulars 
witli  them,  until  we  compel  them  to  ac- 
cede to  our  sentence:  for  a  refutation 
combined  with  a  knowledge  of  the  matter 
before  us,  is  the  most  likely  mode  of  ob- 
taining their  confidence."  And  in  another 
passage  he  saysf — "  For  we  must  give  to 
the  Greeks  who  ask  for  that  wisdom, 
which  is  in  esteem  among  them,  such 
things  as  they  are  accustomed  to,  in  order 
that  they  may  be  brought  to  a  belief  in 
the  truth  by  the  most  easy  way,  through 
their  own  proper  method.  '  For  I  be- 
came,' says  tlie  apostle,  '  all  things  to  all 
men,  that  I  might  win  all.' " 

The  most  eager  antagonists  of  this  free 
spirit,  in  order  wholly  to  condemn  the 
occupying  oiu'selves  with  the  Grecian 
philosophy,  appealed  to  the  Jewish  tale 
related  in  the  Apocryphal  Book  of  Enoch, 
that  all  the  higher  branches  of  knowledge 
had  come  to  the  Heathens  in  an  unlawful 
manner,  through  the  communications  of 
fallen  spirits,  and  they  looked  upon  all 
heathen  philosophers  without  distinction, 
as  instruments  of  the  evil  Spirit.  They 
either  considered  the  whole  antichristian 
world  only  in  stern  opposition  to  Chris- 
tianity; they  confounded  that  which  is 
heathen  with  that  original  and  divine  sys- 
tem, without  which  the  heathenism  that 
only  adulterated  and  troubled  this  original 
system,  could  never  even  have  existed  at 
ail;  they  woidd  not  so  much  as  hear  of 
any  point  through  which  Christianity 
could  be  engrafted  on  a  nature  and  quali- 
ties in  man,  which  are  akin  to  the  Divinity, 
and   which  beam   through   it  constantly 

*  I.  278.  [i.  e.  Ed.  Paris.  In  Sylburg.  ed.  p. 
120.  In  Potter,  vol.  i.  p.  327.  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p. 
15.] 

t  V.  55i.     [Pott.  656.    Sylb.  237.] 


PHILOSOPHY    P.EDAGOGICALLY    CONSIDERED. 


even  in  its  worst  corniption;  and  yet  i 
without  such  a  point,  Christianity  could 
never  have  propagated  itself  upon  the 
heathen  soil; — or  else,  like  tlie  impetuous, 
fiery  Tertullian — the  friend  of  nature,  and 
of  all  tlie  original  revelations  of  life,  the 
enemy  of  art,  and  of  all  perversion  (of 
such  revelation) — tliey  saw  in  philosophy 
only  the  hand  of  Satan,  that  adulterates 
and  mutilates  the  original  nature  of  man. 
Clement  endeavoured  to  refute  this  party 
also  on  their  own  principles.  "  Even  if 
this  view  were  just,''  he  says,  "  yet  could 
Satan  deceive  men  only  when  he  clothed 
himself  as  an  angel  of  light:  he  must 
attract  man  by  the  appearance  of  truth, 
and  by  the  intermixture  of  truth  and  false- 
hood ;  and  man  mu«t  always  seek  the 
truth,  and  acknowledge  it,  let  it  come 
from  whom  it  may.  And  even  this  com- 
munication can  only  take  place  in  accord- 
ance with  God's  will,  and  therefore, 
nuii«t  have  been  contemplated  in  the  plan 
of  education  proposed  for  humanity  by 
God."* 

But  this  view,  however,  which  was  so 
exceedingly  contradictory  to  the  natural 
development  and  progress  of  human  na- 
ture, was  thoroughly  repugnant  to  his 
own  sentiments;  and  he  expresses  him- 
self very  strongly  against  it,  when  he 
speaks  in  conformity  with  his  own  views. 
'»  Is  it  not  then  absurd,"  he  says,  "  while 
we  attribute  disorder  and  sin  to  Satan,  to 
make  him  the  giver  of  a  good  thing,  i.  e. 
philosophy.'  for  he  appears,  under  this 
point  of  view,  to  have  been  more  benevo- 
lent towards  good  men  among  the  Greeks 
than  Divine  Providence."| 

Clement  was  inclined  rather  to  seek  in 
the  progress  of  the  Greek  philosophy  the 
work  of  God  in  his  care  for  the  improve- 
ment of  man,  and  a  preparation  for  Chris- 
tianity adapted  to  the  peculiarities  of  the 
Greek  character;  as  it  is  impossible  to 
deny  that  the  philosophical  development 
of  the  human  mind,  which  proceeded  from 
the  Greeks,  tended  both  negatively  and 
positively  to  render  the  soil  capable  of  the 
reception  of  the  Gospel.  The  idea  of 
the  Divine  education  of  man  as  a  great 
whole,  was  Clement's  favourite  idea,  and 
he  conceived  the  object  of  this  great 
scheme  to  be  Christianity;  and  to  this 
he  attributed  the  dealings  of  God,  not 
only  with  the  Jewish   people,  but   also 


•  This  is  the  substance  of  passages  found  in  vi. 
647.  [Pott.  773.  Sylh.  274.]  and  i.  310.  [Pott. 
367.     Sylb.  134.] 

t  L.  c.  vi.  693.  [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  822.  Syl- 
burg,  294.    Ed.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  198.] 


343 

those  with  the  heathen  world,  although 
not  in  the  same  manner.  The  Alexan- 
drians combated  that  confined  view  [lit. 
particularism]  which  would  limit  the  gov- 
ernment of  God,  in  whom  we  live,  and 
move,  and  are,  only  to  the  narrow  limits 
of  the  Jewish  people.  Thus  Clement 
says,  "  Every  good  impulse  comes  from 
God ;  he  uses  those  men  who  are  fit  to 
lead  and  to  instruct  other  men,*  as  in- 
struments for  [the  improvement  of]  the 
greater  mass  of  mankind.  Such  men  were 
the  better  class  of  Greek  philosophers. 
Philosophy,  which  forms  man  to  virtue, 
cannot  be  a  work  of  evil ;  it  can  only  be 
a  work  of  God,  whose  work  every  im- 
pulse to  good  is.  And  all,  which  is  given 
by  God  must  be  given  and  received  with 
advantage.  Philosophy  is  not  found  in 
the  hands  of  the  wicked,  but  it  was  given 
to  the  best  among  the  Greeks ;  and  it  is, 
therefore,  evident  whence  it  was  given, — 
it  must  have  been  given  by  Providence, 
which  gives  to  every  man  that  which  is 
adapted  to  his  peculiar  condition.  It  is 
clear  also  that  the  law  was  given  to  the 
Jews,  and  philosophy  to  the  Greeks,  till 
the  appearance  of  our  Lord ;  and  hence 
proceeds  the  universal  call  to  a  peculiar 
people  of  Righteousness,  in  virtue  of  the 
doctrine  which  we  receive  by  faith,  as  the 
one  God  of  both,  the  Greeks  and  the 
barbarians,  or  rather  of  the  Avhole  race 
of  man,  brought  all  together  through  the 
one  Lord.t  "  Before  the  appearance  of 
our  Lord,  philosophy  among  the  Greeks 
was  necessary  for  righteousness,  but  now 
it  is  useful  for  the  furtherance  of  holi- 
ness, as  a  kind  of  preparation  for  the  de- 
monstration of  the  faith ;  for  thy  foot 
will  not  stumble,  if  thou  trace  up  every 
j  good  thing,  whether  it  belongs  to  the 
j  heathen  or  to  us — to  Providence  ;  for 
1  God  is  the  cause  of  every  good  thing, 
\  but  partly  in  an  especial  manner,  as  (he 
lis  the  cause)  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
;  Testament,  and  partly  in  a  more  remote 
j  (or  derivative)  manner,  as  he  is  of  phi- 
I  losophy.  But,  perhaps,  even  this  was 
also  given  in  an  especial  luanner  to  the 
Greeks  at  that  time,  l)efore  the  Lord  called 
j  the  heathen  also,  for  it  educated  the  hea- 
then as  the  law  did  tlie  Jews  for  Chris- 
!  tianity,  and  thus  philosophy  was  a  degree 
j  of  preparation  for  him,   who   was   to  be 

*  The  nyiiA'^viKU  and  miStuTMu 

f  vi.  393,' 4,  [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  822,  823.  Ed. 
Sylb.  p.  294.  Ed.  Par.  G03,  694.  Ed.  Klotz. 
§  158,  159,  vol.  iii.  p.  197,  198.  The  passage 
is  abridged.  I  have  followed  the  German. — 
H.  J.  It.] 


344 


PHILOSOPHY   A   TRANSITION  POINT. 


brought  to  perfection  by  Christ."*  When 
Clement  speaks  here  of  a  righteousness  to 
be  attained  by  philosophy,  lie  does  not 
mean  to  say  tliat  philosophy  can  impart 
to  man  the  disposition  requisite  to  the 
fulfihiient  of  his  moral  destination,  and 
the  attainment  of  the  happiness  of  heaven  ; 
he  makes  a  distinction  between  a  doctrine 
iustifying  man,  which  with  him  can  be 
only  the  Gospel,  and  such  a  one  as 
can  merely  prepare  him  for  that.|  He 
makes  a  distinction  between  a  certain 
degree  of  awakenment  in  the  moral  and 
religious  conscience,  as  well  as  of  excite- 
ment to  moral  endeavours,  and  of  moral 
preparation  ■,  and  between  the  universal 
perfect  righteousness,  which  is  the  object 
of  the  whole  nature  of  man,J  and  is  op- 
posed to  that  cultivation  of  man's  nature 
which  is  only  partially  adapted  for  a  cer- 
tain condition  of  human  development : 
he  himself  says  of  the  Greek  philosophy,§ 
that  it  is  too  weak  to  practise  the  com- 
mandments of  God,  and  that  it  makes  men 
capable  of  receiving  the  most  majestic 
doctrines  only  by  ennobling  their  morals, 
and  by  furthering  their  belief  in  tlie  super- 
intendence of  Providence.il  "  As  God," 
says  Clement,  "  willed  the  salvation  of 
the  Jews,  by  giving  them  prophets,  so 
also  he  separated  the  most  pre-eminent 
among  the  Greeks  from  the  mass  of  or- 
dinary men,  by  making  them  come  for- 
ward as  their  own  prophets,  in  their  own 
language,  inasmuch  as  they  were  capable 

of  receiving  the  blessing  of  God 

As  now  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  has 
come  at  a  convenient  season,!!  so  also 
were  the  law  and  the  prophets  bestowed 
upon  the  Jews,  and  philosophy  upon  the 


*  Strom,  i.  282.  [i.  e.  ed.  Paris,  vol.  i.  p.  331. 
Ed.  Pott.  p.  121,  122.  Ed.  Sylburg.  vol.  ii.  p. 
20.     Ed.  Klotz.] 

■j"  £>iS:tiTx.a.Kt:i  «  T6  Sin.-'iciKri, «'  TS  a;  tcuto  ^u^ctyai- 
ycv<r'JL  x.tt  (TuKKajj-^^tw-ya.,  vi.  844. 

[Tlie  context  is  here  imi)orlant.  Clement  says, 
that  as  every  relation  {jr-xTftiL)  ultimately  ascends 
to  God  the  Creator,  so  also  to  the  Lord  must  be 
referred,  jj  Tm  kxkuiv  JiSu.irKit\t^,  «  n,  &c.  Potter's 
edit.  vol.  ii.  p.  770.  Sylburg.  p.  274.  Klotz, 
vol-  iii.  p.  134.— H.J.  R.] 

X  «  KaBoKov  tfwa/co-uvii,  Strom,  i.  319.  [Potter, 
vol.  i.  p.  377.  Sylb  p.  137.     Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  70.] 

§  i.  309.  [Pott.  i.  p.  366.  Sylb.  p.  133,  Klotz, 
vol.  ii.  p.  ^7.] 

II    'A///i^iT)i   a-ai^e^cvi^'.utroL  to   >16o?  KUt    (a'.  Ktti  to 

oKybu-M  Tiiv  Treoiu^y  Si^-j^iuasi.  [Ita  ap.  iNeand. 
Sc^u^ovTSL,  Potter,  Klotz,  &c.,  which  seems  the  right 
reading. — H.  J.  K.] 

^[  Kxra  K3t;gcv,  i.  e.  after  human  nature  had  been 
prepared  for  it  by  the  previous  dealings  of  God. 


Greeks  at  the  proper  time,  in  order  to  ac- 
custom their  ears  to  the  Gospel  message."* 
Clement  had  observed,  from  inter- 
course with  many  who  had  received  a 
philosophical  education,  and  perhaps,  had 
learned  also  from  his  own  experience, 
that  previous  philosophical  culture  might 
become  a  means  of  facilitating  conver- 
sion, (lit.  a  transition  point,)  to  Chris- 
tianity, as  he  appeals  for  proof  of  what 
has  been  alleged  to  the  circumstanee, 
that  those  who  received  the  feith,  whe- 
ther prepared  for  it  by  the  Greek  phi- 
losophy, or  by  the  Jewish  law,  were  both 
led  to  the  o7ie  race  of  the  redeemed  peo- 
ple.y  As  the  Pharisees,  who  had  mixed 
the  law  of  God  with  human  traditions, 
by  Christianity  attained  to  a  right  know- 
ledge of  the  law  ;  so  the  philosophers, 
who  had  defiled  the  revelation  of  Divine 
truth  to  the  soul  of  man  by  the  partial 
and  imperfect  views  to  which  human  na- 
ture is  liable  (lit.  by  human  otie-sided- 
ness)  attained  to  true  philosophy  by 
means  of  Christianity  .J  Clement,  in  or- 
der to  represent  the  ennoblement  of  phi- 
losophy afforded  by  Christianity,  uses  the 
simile  of  a  graft  which  had  been  used  by 
the  apostle  in  a  kindred  sense,  and  was 
very  expressive  and  well  adapted  to  de- 
note the  ennoblement  of  human  nature 
by  Christianity.  The  wild  olive  tree§  is 
not  deficient  in  sap,  but  in  the  power  of 
properly  concocting  the  juices  which  cir- 
culate through  it.  Now,  when  the  germ  of 
the  garden  olive  is  engrafted  upon  the  wild 
stem,  the  former  obtains  more  sap,  which 
it  appropriates  to  itself,  and  the  latter  the 
power  to  assimilate  (or  digest)  it.  Thus 
also  the  philosopher,  who  is  compared  to 
the  wild  olive  tree,  has  much  which  is 
undigested,  because  he  is  full  of  the  ver- 
satile spirit  of  inquiry,  and  longs  after  tlie 
noble  nourishment  of  trutli ;  and  if  he  now 
receives  Divine  power  through  faith,  then 


*  Totc  iixo!tf  sfl/fcuo-a  !rgoc  to  mi^vy/mst.  Strom, 
vi.  636.  (Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  761—2.  Sylb.  p,  270. 
Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  123 

t  vi.  636,  637.  [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  761—763. 
Sylb.  p.  270.     Klotz.  vol.  iii.  p.  122.  123.] 

tvi.  644.  [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  769,  770.  Sylb. 
p.  273.     Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  133.] 

^  vi.  671.  [vi.  672.  Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  799. 
Sylb.  p.  285.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  170.  The  German 
is  hardly  an  exact  translation  of  the  Greek.  It  is 
rather  a  condensation  of  the  text  of  Clement.  I 
have,  therefore,  followed  the  German.  The  word 
verdauen,  to  digest  or  concoct,  I  have  translated 
by  a.ssimt7a/e,  which  is  equally  applicable  to  veget- 
able  and  animal  functions.  See  Prout's  Bridge- 
water  Treatise,  part  iii.,  especially  p.  469.) — 
H.  J.  R.] 


INTERMIXTURE    OF    PLATONISM    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 


345 


he  will  be  able  to  digest  the  nourishment 
imparted  to  liim,  and  become  a  garden 
olive  tree."  He  beautifully  illustrates  the 
difference  between  the  pure  revelation  of 
truth  in  Christianity,  and  those  individual 
beams  of  truth  which  are  dimmed  by  an 
intermixture  of  human  imperfection,  by 
a  comparison  drawn  from  the  light  artifi- 
cially imprisoned  in  a  burning  lens,  as 
contrasted  with  the  pure  and  clear  sun- 
shine.* The  Alexandrians  were  full  of 
the  great  idea,  which  now,  when  Chris- 
tianity if  ^707?  louvfold  its  essential  nature 
to  the  thinking  mind,  for  the  first  time  re- 
vealed itself  in  a  passing  manner,  and  was 
unable  as  yet  to  become  the  principle 
which,  carried  out  into  every  individual 
application,  should  be  the  life-giving  prin- 
ciple of  Christian  theology,  and  of  a 
Christian  consideration  of  hietory,  the 
idea  which  alone  gives  the  right  key  to 
the  contemplation  of  human  nature  and 
of  history  ;  namely,  that  Christianity  is, 
as  it  were,  the  centre  to  all  the  rays  of 
human  imperfection|  (lieralJij,  one-sided- 
ness;)  that  it  proves  itself  the  religion 
of  human  nature,  inasmuch  as  it  recon- 
ciles with  each  other  all  the  contending 
dispositions  which  meet  each  other  in 
human  nature  ;  that  it  divides  truth  from 
falsehood  in  all  human  and  imperfect  sys- 
tems, that  treat  of  Divine  matters ;  and 
that  it  teaches  us  to  recognise  in  errors 
the  truth,    which    being   misunderstood, 


luK'.  Kay.TnJrn,  v.  5fi0,  vi.  688.  '  [Potter,  vol.  li.  p. 
663.  Sylb.  p.  239.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  22.  iVow, 
I  do  not  see  any  mention  in  thi.s  passage  of  Brenn- 
glas,  though  the  part  of  the  sentence  which  fol- 
lows should  be  given  also ;  it  is  this  iiv  Liitttcvtiv 
cvSjaiTT'-/,  TTi^a.  rxicu  KXiTTTcvTi;  hTt^vai;  to  4/»f.  It 
seems  to  me  only  a  comparison  of  the  artificial  and 
fieble  light  of  a  lain]),  which  is,  in  fact,  origi- 
nally  stalcnfrom  the  .sun,  to  the  full  clear  light  of 
day.  The  Rrtnnglus  is  taken  from  vi.  688, 
(Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  817.  Svlb.  p.  292.  Klotz, 
vol.  iii.  p.  191,)  where  a  dilTerent  simile  is  used, 

ejM-  iiit'^;  juii'Jiuu  »  Tsp^vx  lie  5n/g,  cCfce  x.cil  i 
<;:/Accrc<f/K  ix,  TK  (iui(  jft^wc  TO  ijUTni^tufjist  hA^cu<rn 
h  i?jy'.is  cpuvTa^sTa/. —  H.  J.  R.] 

•j-  [I  understand  by  this  a  point  in  which  all 
hmnan  dispositions  which  are  apt  to  run  into  ex- 
cess, each  in  one  direction,  and  thus  some  in  di- 
rections exactly  opposite  to  each  other,  may  meet 
and  be  reconciled  and  united  ;  e.  g.  extreme  li- 
lierality  tends  to  prodigality,  extreme  prudence  to 
inhumanity  ;  Christianity  alone  gives  the  right  di- 
rection of  the  heart  which  shall  unite  the  two  pro- 
perly. I  have  thought  it  necessary  to  add  this  ex- 
planation, because  I  do  not  choose  to  incorporate 
A  paraphrase  with  the  text,  and  the  literal  transla- 
tion hardly  gives  an  adequate  notion  of  the  mean- 
ing to  the  English  reader. — H.  J.  K.] 

44 


I  has  formed  the  foundation  of  them. 
Such  a  light  of  tlie  Spirit,  according  to 
\the  idea  of  Clement^  o\\g\\i  Christianity 
to  have  lighted  for  the  Gnostic,  and  thus 
,  ought  he,  standing  on  the  ground  of  Chris- 
tianity, through  which  he  has  attained  the 
■  true  centre  for  the  religious  nature  of  man, 
,  to  be  able  freely  and  securely  to  separate 
truth  and  falsehood  from  each  other  in 
all  the  systems  of  Grecian  philosophers 
and  Christian  heretics.  Thus  Clement 
says  :*  "  As  truth  is  one,  ibr  falsehood 
only  has  a  thousand  paths  of  error,  in 
which  truth  is  dismembered,  just  as  the 
Baccha?  dismembered  the  body  of  Pen- 
theus,  thus  the  sects  of  the  philosophy 
derived  from  the  barbarians  {the  Chris- 
tian) and  of  the  Hellenic  philosophy  pride 
themselves  upon  that  portion  of  truth, 
which  each  happens  to  possess,  as  if  it 
were  the  whole  truth,  but  all  is  enlight- 
ened at  the  rising  of  the  dawn.  As,"  he 
says,  '^  eternal  existence^  represents  that 
in  0726  moment,  which  is  broken  by 
means  of  time  into  past,  present,  and 
future,  so  also  is  truth  able  to  collect  to- 
gether the  seeds  which  belong  to  her, 
even  if  they  may  have  fallen  into  a  strange 
,  soil.  The  Hellenic  and  the  barbarian 
;  philosophy  have  in  some  sort  received 
'portions  of  eternal  truth;  they  have  re- 
ceived not  Dionysius,  as  in  that  mystical 
legend,  but  the  divine  revelation  of  the 
\  eternal  Logos,  dismembered  and  divided 
.  into  fragments.  But  he  who  gathers  to- 
gether again  that  which  was  torn  asunder 
by  them,  and  reinstates  the  Word  in  its 
perfection  and  unity,  will  without  doubt, 
learn  the  truth. "J  This  mode  of  view 
peculiarly  distinguished  the  Alexandrians, 
as  compared  with  the  partial  polemical 
views  of  other  divines,  and  therefore,  they 
alone  were  in  a  condition  to  appreciate, 
,  with  less  prejudice,  the  opinions  of  here- 
tics, to  judge  about  them  with  more  jus- 
tice, and  in  considering  their  systems,  to 
separate  not  only  the  truth  from  the  false- 
j  hood   which  appeared  in  them,  but  the 

•  i.    298.     [Potter,  i.  p.   348.     Sylb.  p.  128. 
'  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  43.— H.  J.  R.] 
j      f  "  Das  ewige  Seyn."    In  the  Greek  it  is  i  aluv. 
'  — H.  J.  R.] 

j  i  Strom,  i.  298,  as  above.  [Potter  punctuates 
1  and  explains  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence  some- 
what differently.  It  is  thus :  o  Jtrx  Sut^n/ufi/i  a-vt- 
6ac,  KM  ivovoi^a-it  tsas/sv  Acj.6v  uKivJuvir;  «i  iTb'  or/ 
x«Tc4«T*/,  t;iv  uxiifewav.  He,  therefore,  makes  txv 
I  uX»6Mav  in  apposition  with  TSAaov  toy  A.,  but  I  ap- 
j  prehend  JVeander's  is  probably  the  more  correct 
I  construction,  for  I  think  in  the  other  case  we 
I  should  have  tcv  tj>.ocv  At^cv.  To.a'.v  is  the  predi- 
1  cate  of  a  clause  of  the  sentence. — H.  J.  R.] 


346 


INTERMIXTURE    OF    PLATONISM    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 


important  errors    also    from   the   imim- 
portant.* 

On  the  one  side  it  may,  indeed,  also 
appear  that  Clement,  far  from  supporting 
the  Gnostic  distinction  between  an  esoteric 
and  an  exoteric  Christianity  made  one  life 
of  faith  in  all  Christians,  and  understood 
by  Gnosis  nothing  but  a  well-informed 
knowledge  and  capacity  of  explaining 
the  one  faith,  whicii  was  to  belong  to  all 
Chrisiians.  It  is  certain,  in  accordance 
with  the  connected  theory,  which  has 
been  laid  down  above,  and  which  may 
be  proved  by  many  passages  of  Clement, 
that  this  alone  was  his  impression  on  the 
one  side,  but  on  the  other  side  we  find  also 
indications,  tliat  he  had  no  clear  view  of 
the  bearing  which  dillerent  forms  of  reli- 
gious belief  and  knowledge  had  to  the 
essential  character  of  the  Christian  life. 
Beautifully  as  he  speaks  in  many  passages 
of  the  nature  and  the  power  of  faith ^  yet 
he  was  not  always  clearly  conscious  to 
himself  of  the  full  meaning  of  these  de- 
clarations, and  they  did  not  become  prin- 
ciples, logically  carried  out,  of  his  dog- 
matical (doctrinal)  opinions.  There  was 
mixed  up  with  that  idea  of  faith  which 
Clement  had  deduced  from  the  essential  i 
nature  of  Christianity,  the  idea  wliich 
adhered  to  Clement  from  his  former  Pla-  I 
tonism,  namely,  the  idea  of  a  mythical 
popular  faith,!  "^  which  fancy  and  truth 
are  intermixed,  as  contrasted  with  the 
pure  religious  knowledge  of  the  philo- 
sophically educated,  and  this  notion 
would  have  a  close  affinity  with  the 
Gnostic  ideas  of  the  relation  of  yma-K;  to 
wts-Tif.  By  many  explanations,  which 
he  gives,  he  appears  to  understand  by 
wicTTK  only  a  very  subordinate  slagfe  of 
subjective  Christianity,  and  of  the  Chris- 
tian life,  a  carnal  faith,  received  upon 
authority  and  clinging   to   the   letter,   a 


*  Hist,  as  in  Strom,  vi.  675.  [Pott.  vol. 
ii.  p.  802.  Sylb.  p.  287.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p. 
195.]    The  important  distinction  is  made  between 

01  TTigl  TIV3.  TtDV  SV    /UifJI  ITCpaWOfAiVCl    ailj    thoSC   ol    £K 

TO.  Ku^icTctTit  7rst^i7ri7r'r(,vTiu  Clement  also  in 
vi.  647.  [Pott.  vol.  ii.  p.  773.  Sylb.  p.  275. 
Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  138,]  argues  against  the  blind 
condemnation  of  all,  which  is  said  by  heretical 
teachers,  merely  on  account  of  the  person  by 
whom  it  is  said,  without  weighing  the  matter  it- 
self, and  this  he  does  particularly  with  reference 
to  the  Montatiistic  prophets.  "  Nor  must  we  on 
account  of  the  person  who  speaks  ignorantly,  con- 
demn before  hand  that  which  he  says,  which  ob- 
servation is  applicable  to  those  who  now  pass  as  1 
prophets,  but  we  must  j)rovc  that  which  is  said,  | 
whether  it  is  conformable  to  the  truth." 

f  S'.^x  raiv  TroKKcty,  ' 


I  faith  which  is  still  far  removed  from  the 
true  spirit  and  essence  of  Christianity, 
and  which,  as  Clement  represents  it,  is 
essentially  more  able  to  repress  the  ex- 
ternal outbreaks  of  evil,  than  to  produce 
true  inw-ard  sanctification  of  the  heart 
(although  he  well  knew  that  on  this  latter 
the  very  essence  of  practical  Christianity 
depends ;)  but  ytua-K;,  on  the  contrary,  is 
in  his  language,  an  inward,  living,  spi- 
ritual Christianity,  a  Divine  life.  ]f  the 
mere  Believer  is  impelled  towards  good 
by  fear  of  punishment  and  hope  of  future 
happiness,  the  Gnostic^  on  the  contrary, 
is  animated  toward  all  good  by  the  in- 
ward, free  impulse  of  love ;  he  needs  no 
outward  grounds  to  persuade  him  of  the 
Divine  origin  of  Christianity,  he  lives  in 
the  consciousness  and  in  the  perception* 
of  Divine  truth  and  even  already  feels 
himself  blessed  by  its  means.  If  the 
mere  Believer  (ttic-tixoO  acts  on  the  dic- 
tates of  uncertain  feelings,  and  therefore, 
at  times  fails  in  doing  that  which  is  right, 
or  does  it,  but  not  in  the  right  way,  the 
Gnostic,  on  the  contrary,  acts  always 
under  the  guidance  of  an  enlightened 
reason  with  clear  Christian  views  and 
with  a  consciousness  of  their  clearness.| 

*  [Anschauung.  This  word  is  variously  used. 
It  sometimes  means  merely  contemplation,  some- 
times intuitive  perception,  sometimes  the  object  of 
our  perception.  It  is  here  applied  to  the  act,  ami, 
therefore,  may  be  rendered  perception,  as  showing 
that  the  Gnostic  has  (in  the  view  of  Clement)  as 
clear  perceptions  of  Divine  truth,  as  men  usually  • 
have  of  those  ideas,  which  we  call  ideas  of  sen- 
sation. See  the  Edinb.  Rev.  for  Oct.  1832.— H. 
J.  R.] 

f  Clement,  Stromat.  518-9,  [Pott.  vol.  i.  p.  612, 
615.  Sylb.  p.  222-3.  Klotz,  vol.  ii.  p.  338,  341.] 
645.  [Pott.  vol.  ii.  p.  770-1.  Sylb.  p.  274.  Klotz, 
vol.  iii.  p.  133-4.]  652.  [Pott.  vol.  ii.  p.  777-8. 
Sylb.  p.  277.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  143.]  where  he 
says  that  the  Trt^n;  yvui-TMH  has  already  received 
in  anticipation,  what  to  others  is  still  something 
future  ;  through  love,  the  future  is  to  him  already 
present;  ii-Ttv  oLtui  Si  uyxTrnv  ivio-n,;  ih  to  f/.ikKcv; 
vi.  663,  [Pott.  vol.  ii.  p.  789.  Sylb.  p.  281.  Klotz. 
vol.  iii.  p.  158,]  where  he  divides  good  into  that 
which  is  worthy  of  being  pursued  for  its  own 
sake,  and  that  wliich  is  only  a  means  to  something 
higher.  Gnosis  belongs  to  the  first  class,  because 
we  shall  attain  nothing  else  by  means  of  it,  when  it 
is  attained,  but  only  obtain  the  possession  of  itself, 
and  be  in  the  enjoyment  of  an  uninterrupted  imme- 
diate knowledge,*  and  we  shall  make  our  way  to 


*  Anschauung.  See  note  above.  The  last 
clause  of  the  sentence  is  thus  in  the  German: 
dass  wir  uns  in  ununterbrocheiien  Anschauung 
befindcn,  und  zu  dioser  und  durch  diese  uns 
durchkampfcn;  by  which  I  only  understand  that 
this  stale  becomes  a  means  only  to  its  own  con- 
tinuance, and  not  an  introduction  to  a  higher  state. 
-11.  J.  R. 


NOTIONS    OF    7r»3-T»f    AND    yvua-n;- 


Wheie  Clement  speaks  of  the  progres- 
sive enlargement  of  the  Divine  scheme 
for  the  education  of  man,  and  represents 
the  Logos  as  the  Gc-to?  wai^ays-voj,  he 
says,*  "All  men  belong  to  him,  some  of 
them  with  a  consciousness  of  what  he  is 
to  them,  {y./zT  fTTiywcru,)  Others  without 
that  consciousness;  some  as  friends,  some 
as  faithful  servants,  and  others  merely  as 
servants ;  it  is  the  teacher,  who  leads  the 
Gnostic  by  the  revelation  of  mysteries, 
(the  inward  perception  of  truth,)  the  be- 
liever by  good  hojjes,  and  the  hard-hearted 
by  corrective  discipline,  by  appeals  to  the 
senses."  Now  here  Clement's  ypua-Tiy.o<; 
appears  in  many  respects  to  resemble  the 
-nrviv/xuTtKci;  of  the  Gnostics,  and  liis 
•n-io-Totcf  their  i^v^iy.oc,  and  in  regard  to 
their  interior  life  they  both  appear  to  bear 
the  same  relation  to  each  other,  but  there 
is,  nevertheless,  this  great  distinction,  that 
amidst  all  the  differences  which  tiiey  held 
to  exist  in  the  subjective  Christianity  of 
the  two  conditions,  the  Alexandrians 
maintained  that  there  was  the  selfsame 
foundation  of  objective  Christianity,  of 
which  they  only  admitted  different  con- 
ceptions, the  one  more  spiritual  and  the 
other  more  sensuous,  nor  did  they,  like 
the  Gnostics,  make  these  two  dillerent 
subjective  conditions  dependent  on  an 
original  and  ineflkceable  difference  of  hu- 
man dispositions.  It  may,  indeed,  be 
said,  that,  nevertheless,  the  two  differ- 
ent conditions  of  subjective  Christianity 
which  Clement  distinguishes  from  each 
other,  were  really  in  existence  in  his  day, 
and  are  again  found  in  other  times,  inas- 
much as  they  are  founded  in  the  very 
nature  of  man ;  and  therefore,  that  it 
cannot  be  of  so  nmcli  consequence,  by 
what  name  we  distinguish  tlie  two  condi- 
tions, nor  can  it  make  so  great  a  difference 
whether  we  consider  them  as  two  dif- 
ferent stages  in  the  tlevelopment  of  faith, 
and  of  the  life  under  the  influence  of  fiith, 
or  whether  we  accord  the  true  spiritual 
life  of  faith  only  to  Gnosis,  as  Clement 
has  done  in  many  passages.  And  yet 
this  difference  is  by  no. means  so  unim- 


tliis  and  through  this,  [i.  e.  a  state  to  which  we 
attain  through  itself. — H.  J.  R.]  Faith  belongs 
to  tlie  second  class,  on  account  of  the  fear  of 
punishment  which  arises  from  it,  and  on  account 
of  advantages,  and  the  hope  of  reward;  fear  being 
a  motive  to  the  muhitude  to  abstain  from  sinning, 
and  the  promises  a  motive  to  strive  after  obedience, 
through  which  the  happiness  of  heaven  is  to  be 
obtained. 

*   viii.  702.     [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  831-2.     Sylb. 
p.  298.     Klotz,  iii.  209,  and  seqc^.] 


3^ 


portant,  as  it  may  seem  at  first  view,  but 
its  foundations  lie  deeper  and  its  conse- 
quences are  more  important.  The  cause 
that  the  Alexandrians  conceived  the  thing 
in  this  way,  lay  partly  in  their  own  pre- 
dominant turn  of  mind,  and  partly  in  the 
manner  in  which  they  viewed  the  faith  of 
a  large  class  of  Christian  people. 

As  far  as  the  first  is  concerned,  the 
contemplative  and  speculative  turn  of 
mind  was  far  too  predominant  among  the 
Alexandrians,  and  this  prevented  them 
from  recognising  in  its  full  extent  the 
independent  practical  power  of  faith  in 
the  reformation  of  the  interior  life,  and 
they  were  still  under  the  influence  of  that 
view,  which  proceeded  from  the  Platonic 
School,  and  was  natural,  indeed,  generally 
to  the  whole  of  the  ancient  world,  nainely, 
that  the  inward,  spiritual,  and  religious 
life,  in  short,  maturity  in  religion,  could 
not  exist  without  philosophical  culture 
of  the  mind.* 

As  far  as  the  second  point  is  concerned, 
we  must  take  into  the  account  the  manner 
in  which  they  (the  Alexandrians,)  were 
often  accustomed  to  meet  with  faith  in  a 
certain  class  of  uneducated  Christians,  as 
a  mere  belief  received  upon  authority, 
united  with  a  sensuous  Eud[emonism,"f 
and  a  fear  of  hell,  that  presented  to  the 
mind  only  images  of  horror  derived  from 
the  senses.  They  could  not  mistake  the 
bettering  influence  of  faith  upon  the  life, 
even  where  it  appeared  to  them  under 
this  form,  when  they  compared  what  these 
men  had  become,  as  Christians,  with  what 
they  had  been  as  heathens  ;  but  they  did 
not  believe  that  tliey  could  perceive  any 
traces  of  the  ennobling  influence  of  Chris- 
tianity upon  the  whole  inward  nature  of 
man,  or  of  a  divine  spiritual  life  ;  and  this 
sensuous  Christianity  was  in  contradic- 
tion to  their  spiritualized  religious  habits 

*  There  is  a  remarkable  passage  in  Clement, 
vi.  691,  in  which  he  distinguishes  an  inward  per- 
ception, [Geistes-anschauung,]  a  learned  know- 
ledge or  Gnosis  and  faith,  from  one  another.  The 
first,  or  yoxTi;,  consists  in  an  immediate  connection 
of  the  Spirit  with  the  highest  origin  of  things, 
the  mere  iTiJiu>j,uv ;  yvniTu;  is  distinguished  from 
vo»3-/c  by  the  addition  of  /2s3«-.uv  Ai^w  uir-JtiicTuee, 
the  reception  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  with- 
out the  inward  perception  (anschauung)  in  regard 
to  the  practical  exercise  of  them  is  Faith.  (»  <p^cv 
na-t:)   fv  TJ/c  si;  i'jMf6ii^v  Tv/TWMTt  ^«v:^sv»,  xx/  vytu 

ai/TM  8^4§)/3ij-«c  Th^xr/v  mTTi;  Kr^tTXt. 

■\  Eudacmonisin.  The  word  in  the  original  is 
Eudamonismus,  which  is  a  modern  coinage.  It 
expresses  a  notion  of  the  Deity  being  pleased  with 

I  man  and  rewarding  him,  especially  in  good  that 

I  affects  the  body.— H.  J.  R.] 


348 


SEPARATION    OP    TJiJTK    AND    TnuffH. 


of  thought.  They  might,  therefore,  be  in- 
clined to  attribute  a  very  low  grade  of  the 
religious  life  to  7ri<7T»?  and  to  the  xouoj 
wto-Tjxof,  and  to  consider  the  higher  life 
of  Christianity,  of  which  they  saw  no- 
thing in  the  y.oivoi  wio-thcoi,  as  fruit  due 
only  to  the  yi/uai^  of  the  well  informed 
and  highly  cultivated.  It  must,  indeed,  be 
avowed  that  they  were  very  likely  in  this 
case  to  do  injustice  to  those,  who  were 
in  an  entirely  different  condition  as  re- 
garded both  the  turn  of  their  mind,  and  the 
extent  of  its  development,  if  they  passed 
judgment  upon  the  more  hidden  spiritual 
life  of  faith  from  the  impure  reflection  of 
it  in  a  habit  of  thought,  neither  tho- 
roughly formed,  nor  as  yet  thoroughly 
penetrated  by  the   leaven  of  Christianity. 

The  prejudicial  consequences  of  this 
predominance  of  the  contemplative  and 
speculative  turn  of  mind,  and  of  this  ex- 
tremely sharp  division  of  yvuo-ii  from 
iriarnt  show  themselves  in  Clement  in  a 
variety  of  ways.  Instead  of  bringing 
forward  the  Gnostlcos,  under  the  image 
of  an  humble-minded  Christian,  living  in 
the  constant  conviction  of  the  sinfulness 
that  still  adheres  to  him,  and  constantly 
advancing  in  holiness,  he  often  appears  in 
Clement  under  the  form  of  a  Neoplatonic 
Theosopher,  living  in  contemplative  self- 
sufficingness,*  and  unmoved  by  passions,| 
although,  even  hither  the  Christian  ele- 
ment has  again  made  its  way,  as  may  be 
seen  by  the  circumstance,  that  the  Gnostic 
cannot  feel  himself  entirely  blessed  in  con- 
templation alone,  and  living  for  himself 
and  shut  up  in  himself  alone  ;  but  is  repre- 
sented as  actuated  by  the  desire  of  work- 
ing actively  for  the  benefit  of  others.J 

Hence  also  it  happened,  that  instead  of 
contenting  themselves  with  a  mere  sys- 
tematic {lit.  organic)  development  of  that 
which  is  known  in  faith,  the  Alexan- 
drians wished   to  transcend  the  bounds 


*  [The  word  "  self-sufRciency"  is  so  con- 
stantly used  in  English  in  an  idiomatic  sense,  as 
implying  merely  conceit  and  vanity,  that  I  have 
used  a  word  which,  if  not  a  current  word,  may  be 
perhaps  allowed. — H.  J.  R.] 

f  See  F.  748.  [See  Potter,  vol.  ii.  pp.  881-2, 
Sylb.  p.  318.     Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  2G8.] 

i  Clement  says,  beautifully,  on  this  point: 
"  The  (inostic,  who  sees  his  own  salvation  in  the 
advantage  of  his  neighbour,  may  justly  he  called 
a  living  image  of  the  Lord ;  not  with  regard  to 
the  circumstances  of  liis  outward  form,  but  from 
similarity  to  that  which  he  was  in  power,  nnd  from 
a   resemblance  to  his  preaching."     'O   jvaio-Twsc 

TMC     IUC^<p>l(     iSlljThTU.,    cKKn.     Krf.TX     TO     TJIf     tfuVi^SOJf 

aufA^iXoy  Ksu  hhtx  to  tx;  xaguj**)?  ofitoucua.. 


of  faith  by  their  Gnosis,  and  lost  them- 
selves in  the  region  of  Theosophy,  which 
desired  to  comprehend  divine  things;  so 
that  mistaking  and  overlooking  the  prac- 
tical aim  of  Divine  Revelation  for  the  im- 
provement and  salvation  of  human  nature, 
they  endeavoured  to  find  the  solution  of 
speculative  inquiries  in  Scripture.  When 
many  came  forward  and  opposed  the 
speculative  Gnosis  with  this  just  argu- 
ment:  "The  wise  man  is  persuaded  that 
there  is  much  which  is  incomprehensible, 
and  his  wisdom  even  consists  in  the  very 
acknowledgment  of  the  incomprehensi- 
bleness  of  the  incomprehensible  :"*  Cle- 
ment answered,  "This  is  also  common  to 
those,  who  are  able  to  see  only  a  litde 
way  before  them  ;  the  Gnostic  apprehends 
that  which  appears  to  be  inapprehensible 
to  the  rest  of  men,  for  he  is  persuaded 
that  there  is  nothing  which  cannot  be 
apprehended  by  the  Son  of  God  ;  whence 
it  follows  that  there  is  nothing  Avhich 
cannot  be  taught  [by  him,]  for  he  who 
suflered  out  of  love  to  us,  would  debar 
us  from  nothing  which  could  contri- 
bute to  the  instruction  of  Gnosis."  One 
sees  how  indefiniteness  here  becomes  the 
source  and  foundation  of  great  error,  for 
this  declaration  is  true  enough  when  un- 
derstood of  that  only  which  it  is  neces- 
sary for  man  to  know  for  his  salvation, 
but  not  when  applied  to  things,  which 
serve  only  to  the  gratification  of  specula- 
tive and  ill-directed  curiosity. 

The  notions  of  Clement  in  these  mat- 
ters, are  repeated  in  those  of  his  great 
disciple  Origen,  only  conceived  in  a  pecu- 
liar manner,  full  of  deep  thought,  and 
systematically  worked  out,  but  there  is 
the  same  connection  of  the  ideas  of 
Gnosis  and  Pistis  in  relation,  as  well  to 
diflerent  conditions  of  subjective  Chris- 
tianity, as  to  the  different  operations  of 
a  Divine  scheme  for  the  general  instruc- 
tion of  man,  which  lets  itself  down  to  the 
varied  wants  which  arise  from  the  variety 
of  these  conditions  of  man.  In  his  con- 
troversies with  the  heathen,  who  re- 
proached Christians  with  their  blind  faith, 
Origen  often  declares  it  to  be  a  pecu- 
liarity of  Christianity  as  a  revelation  of 
a  God  who  came  for  the  salvation  of  nil 
men,  that  it  is  able  to  attract  even  the 
multitude  who  are  incapable  of  scientific 
investigation  and  knowledge,  and  in  virtue 

•  vii.  649,  [Potter,  vol.  ii.  p.  77.5.  Sylb.  p. 
276;  Klotz,  vol.  iii,  p.  140.  N.B.  The  refer- 
ence  in  Neander  should  be  vi.  649.  not  vii.  649. — 
H.  J.  R.] 


ORIGExV    ON    FAITH. 


of  mere  faith,*  to  work  upon  them  to 
sanctification  with  divine  power;  and  he 
appeals  to  the  experience  of  very  many, 
as  a  testimony  to  this  eflicacy  of  Chris- 
tianity .j  Those  who  had  attained  to  faith 
at  first  only  in  this  manner,  might  then 
become  impelled  of  their  own  accord  to 
penetrate  constantly  more  and  more  also 
into  the  deeper  sense  of  Soriplure.J  He 
makes  ttjs-tk  the  lowest  stage  of  Chris- 
tianity, which  must,  nevertheless,  have  an 
existence,  in  order,  that  ''  the  simple,  who 
give  themselves  up  to  holiness  according 
to  their  power,  may  be  able  to  attain  sal- 
vation ;"  and  above  faith  he  places  both 
Gnosis  and  Sophia.  This  last  is  that 
Divine  Wisdom,  which  is  imparted  to  the 
souls,  who  are,  by  God's  grace,  capable 
of  receiving  it,  and  who  have  sought  to 
obtain  it  from  God,  by  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  by  prayer.  Human  wisdom, 
the  wisdom  that  belongs  to  our  world,  is 
only  a  preparatory  exercise  of  the  soul, 
in  order  that  it  may  become  capable  of 
attaining  that  which  is  the  real  aim  and 
object  of  its  existence,  by  means  of  cul- 
tivating its  intellectual  faculties.§ 

Origen,  as  well  as  Clement,  in  many 
places  declares  expressly  in  reference  to 
the  nature  of  faith,  that  it  is  a  fact  of  the 
inward  life,  through  which  man  enters 
into  a  real  communion  with  divine  things, 
and  he  distinguishes  this  living  faith 
from  a  belief,  resting  on  authority,  which 
clings  only  to  outward  things.  Thus,  in 
explanation  of  John  viii.  24, ||  he  says, 
"  That  faith  brings  Avith  it  a  spiritual 
communion  with  that  on  which  we  be- 
lieve, and  hence  there  is  generated  a 
kindred  condition  of  the  heart,1  which 
must  show  itself  in  works.  The  object 
of  our  belief  is  received  into  the  inward 
life,  and  becomes  a  forming  and  fashion- 
ing principle  for  it.  In  all  the  relations 
(ewmojai,)  under  which  Christ  becomes 
an  object  of  faith,  according  to  all  these 


•   M'/xx  W/3-T/C,  TrKTTi;  i.X'jyi':. 

-j-  Compare  e.g.  c.  Celsum,  lib.  i.  c.  10. 

i,  C.  Celsum,  lib.  \i.  Philocal.  c.  15.  //st*  tuv 
dT«|  yin/xam  ii3-:tyary>iv  <plKiTi/Jin<r3L(TS<tl  Tg:c  to  km 
P'jtBvTtsu,  Tuv  Ksx-^uju/uiaiav  you/xhtuv  ir  to.k  yfjt/^ati 
jtctTctXi^av. 

§  C.  Cels.  vi.  13.  [Ed.  Spencer,  p.  283.] 
Origen  maintains  that  St.  Paul  sets  those  graces, 
which  are  connected  with  knowledge,  higher  than 
the  gift  of  working  miracles,     ittu  tci  X'^y.v  Tr^-.t- 

St/vijUiav  Kit  ■^■xfiTfj.'i.'rrL  lufAATm  iv  Tit  KiTteTiPui 
tAhti  x^'i"^  -Ti-e^i.  TA  K'.yux  ^t^KT/x^irit.  c.  Cels. 
iii.  40.     [Ed.  Spenc.  p.  139.] 

II  Tom.  xix.  Joh.  §  6.  [See  Origen,  cd.  Huet. 
vol.  ii.  pp.  284,  285.— H.  J.  R.] 


349 

'.  the  believer  receives  Christ  into  his  in- 
ward life  ;  thus,  for  example,  since  Christ 
is  called  the  power  of  God,  power  to  all 
good  action.s  cannot  be  wanting  to  him, 
who  believes  on  Ciirist,  as  the  source  of 
divine  power."  Thus,  in  tom.  xx.,  in  Joh. 

,  c.  XXV.,  he  makes  a  distinction  between  a 
sensuous  belief  in  miracles,  and  a  faith  in 

j  the  truth.  He  compares  John  viii.  43, 
and  45,  and  says,  that  tliose  sensuous  Jews 

[  were     impressed    by    the    miracles,    and 

I  would  have  believed  on  Jesus  as  a  worker 

t  of  miracles,  but  they  were  incapable  of 

I  receiving  Divine  truth,*  and  never  would 
have   believed    on   Jesus   as  a   preacher 

I  of  deep  truth ;  and  he  adds,  '^  This 
may  also  be  seen    in  many,  who  look 

j  with  wonder  on  Jesus,  when  they  con- 
sider his  history,  but  who  cannot  have 

j  any  farther  faith  in  him,  when  a  deep 
doctrine,  which  surpasses  their  compre- 

I  hension,  is  unfolded,  but  begin  to  cavil 
at  it,  and  say  that  it  is  false.  Therefore, 
let  us  take  heed,  lest  he  say  to  us  also, 
'  ye  believe  not  me,  because  I  declare  the 
truth.' "  Nevertheless,  the  relation  to 
what  is  dependent  on  historical  grounds, 
and  the  practical  influence,  which  is  in- 
herent in  the  idea  of  faith,  as  conceived 
by  St.  Paul,  is  clearly  thrown  more  into 
the  back  ground  by  Origen.  That  higher 
condition  of  faith  was,  in  his  notions,  at 
the  same  time  a  condition  in  which  Chris- 
tianity was  applied  and  conceived  in  a 
more  spiritual  manner — a  condition  in 
which  truth  was  more  immediately  the 
object  of  interior  perception ;  and  this 
condition  of  faith  so  exactly  accorded 
with  his  notion  of  the  condition  of  Gnosis, 
that  he  often  contrasts  Gnosis  with  a 
mere  historical  belief  "  Faith  may  exist 
without  a  definite  conception  of  the  thing 
believed."!  He  ascribes  this  Gnosis  to 
those  who  devote  themselves  wholly  to 
the  contemplation  of  Divine  matters,  who 
after  they  have  cleared  their  spirit  from 
foreign  elements,  behold  God  with  more 
godlike  eyes.  He  finds  also  that  such  a 
Gnosis  is  contrasted  with  mere  faith,  in 
John  viii.  31,  32.1  For  this  distinction 
between  Gnosis  and  Pistis  he  appeals  also 
to  1  Cor.  xii.  9  ;  where,  however,  faith 
being  represented  as  a  gift  of  grace,  can- 
*   As  if  our  Saviour  had    intended  to  say,  xstS' 

0  /UK   T^atT*  Tniu,  TtTTeUim  y.A,  Klh'  0    ii  T*y    ci>JlSt/«V 

Kr^<t,  oi  mTTojiTi  ix'A.  [The  reference  in  the  text 
has  not  enabled  me  to  consult  the  original  passage. 
-H.  J.  U.] 

-(■  [Erkcnntnisse  is  the  German  word  here  used, 
which  I  have  translated  "  definite  conception." 
See  the  Conversations  Lexicon  in  vcrbo. — H.  J.  H] 

±  See  t.  xix.  in  Joh.  c.  1. 
2G 


350 


not  be  that  historical  belief  of  which 
Origen  speaks  as  opposed  to  Gnosis,  but 
where  it  is  rather  the  designation  of  a 
peculiarly  practical  power  of  faith.  Origen 
places  tlie  condition  of  Gnosis  so  far 
above  that  of  faith,  that  he  represents  it, 
in  speaking  of  this  contrast,  as  a  life  of 
sight.  '•>  Those,"  he  says,  "  who  have 
received  the  charisma  of  Gnosis  and 
Sophia,  no  longer  live  in  faith,  but  in 
sight;  the  spiritually-minded,  who  already 
dwell  no  longer  in  the  body,  but  even 
here  below,  are  already  present  with  the 
Lord.  But  those  do  still  dwell  in  the 
body,  and  are  not  yet  present  with  the 
Lord,  wlio  do  not  understand  the  spiritual 
sense  of  Scripture,  but  cling  wholly  to  its 
body  (i.  e.  the  letter,  see  below.)  For 
how,  since  the  Lord  is  the  Spirit,  should 
he  not  be  far  from  the  Lord,  who  does 
not  understand  the  life-giving  spirit  and 
the  spiritual  sense  of  Scripture  ?  such  an 
one  lives  in  faith."*  He  busies  himself 
here  very  diligently  in  endeavouring  to 
explain,  after  his  own  notions,  what  St. 
Paul  says  in  utter  contradiction  to  this 
view  in  2  Cor.  v.,  about  the  relation  of 
faith  to  sight;  and  not  without  sophistical 
arguments  involving  a  confusion  of  ideas, 
he  contends  against  the  just  interpretation 
of  most  of  the  fathers,  who  maintain  that 
even  Paul  speaks  of  himself,  as  one  who 
still  lived  in  faith,  and  had  not  yet  arrived 
at  living  in  sight.  He  makes  the  expres- 
sion, "to  dwell  in  the  body,"  entirely 
equivalent  to  "  living  in  the  flesh,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh ;"  and  thus  obtains 
as  a  result,  that  St.  Paul  said  this,  not  in 
reference  to  himself  and  all  spiritually- 
minded  persons,  but  only  in  reference  to 
those  believers,  who  were  still  carnally- 
minded.  He  applies  also  (and  in  him  the 
application  is  consistent)  what  St.  Paul 
says  (1  Cor.  xiii.)  of  the  perfect,  to  the 
genuine  Gnostics,  as  contrasted  with  the 
mere  believers,  who  are  still  in  childhood, 
and  still  have  only  the  mere  partial  know- 
ledge.! This  twofold  condition,  according 
to  the  notion  of  Origen,  corresponds  with 
the  twofold  condition  of  a  spiritual  and 
a  fleshly  Christianity  .J  Me  who  is  in  the 
position  afforded  by  a  fleshly  Christianity, 
abides  only   by  the  letter    of  Scripture, 


ORIGEN    ON   FAITET. 


*  Origen.  t  xiii.  Joh.  c.  52. 

f  In  Matt.  ed.  Huet.  frag.  213.  He  Joes  not 
always  remain  consistent  in  this  respect ;  in  another 
passage  (in  Matt.  271,)  he  properly  refers  'r^^£(cv 
to  eternal  life. 

i  A  -^eja-rtuvKriuaK  Tnisj/uxTixac  and  a  ^^io-tuvkt- 
fJM  a-cc/nUTiK'yg,  a  7r)/ejfA^TtKm;  and  a  (ra/^iaT/xajc  XV' 


I  and  by  the  historical  account  of  Christ ; 
he  clings  only  to  the  outward  appearance 
of  the  Divine,  without  raising  himself  up 
in  spirit  to  the  inward  essence,  which  is 
revealed  in  it;  he  confines  himself  wholly 
to  the  earthly,  temporal,  and  historical 
appearance  of  the  Divine  Logos  ;  he  does 
not  raise  himself  up  to  the  actual  percep- 
tion of  the  latter  (tlie  Logos)  itself;  he 
contents  himself  with  the  mere  shell  of 
the  Christian  doctrines,  without  pene- 
trating to  the  interior  kernel  contained  in 
them ;  he  clings  solely  to  the  letter  of 
Scripture,  in  which  the  spirit  lies  bound. 
The  spiritual  Christian  on  the  contrary, 
in  the  temporal  appearance  and  operations 
of  Christ,  sees  the  revelation  and  the  re- 
presentation of  the  eternal  government 
and  operations  of  the  Divine  Logos  ;  with 
him,  the  letter  of  Scripture  is  only  the 
covering  of  the  spirit,  and  he  knows  how 
to  detach  the  spirit  from  this  covering. 
With  him,  all  that  is  temporal  in  tlie  form, 
under  which  Divine  things  are  presented 
to  us,  is  elevated  into  the  inward  percep- 
tions of  the  spirit ;  with  him  the  sensuous 
Gospel  of  the  letter,*  becomes  spiri- 
tualized into  the  revelation  of  the  eternal 
spiritual  Gospel, f  and  it  is  the  highest 
question  to  which  his  soul  applies  itself, 
to  find  the  latter  in  the  former,  and  to 
turn  the  former  into  the  latter;  and  to 
understand  Holy  Scripture  as  the  revela- 
tion of  a  continuous  scheme  of  education, 
provided  by  the  Logos  for  human  nature, 
and  of  his  uninterrupted  activity  for  the 
salvation  of  man,  a  scheme  of  which  the 
centre  point  is  his  appearance  among 
men  (which  is  the  sensuous  representa- 
tion of  his  eternal  and  spiritual  opera- 
tion,)]}] and  the  aim  of  which  is  to  bring 
back  all  fallen  being  to  God.  While  he 
refers  every  thing  to  this  one  view,  the 
whole  volume  of  Holy  Scripture  becomes 
to  him,  by  means  of  the  Gospel,  elevated 
and  refined  into  Gospel.  Hence,  Origen 
believes  by  means  of  spiritual  communion  . 
with  the  Logos,  by  the  reception  of  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  into  the  inward  life  alone,§ 
can  any  one  attain  to  the  true  spiritual 
Christianity,  and  to  the  right  spiritual  un- 
derstanding of  the  whole  Scripture.  Just 
then  as  the  prophets  before  the  temporal 
advent  of  Christ  were  partakers  in  spi- 
ritual communion  with  the  Divine  Logos, 


-f   Tou  i'jxyyiKitiu  'n-iaJu-jLrix.iiv,  etletvicv. 

i  The  \mSnfAix  tt'tO-BnTn,  an  image  of  the  iTrtfu/uut 

;»T»  TCU  K!,yov. 

§  The  friixfAtx  vhitm  tcv  Xgfo-Tiu. 


SPIRITUAL    AND    CARNAL    CHRISTIANITY. 


351 


and  in  virtue  of  that  communion  were  guardians  and  stewards,  and  have  not  vet 
enabled  to  foretell  that  advent,  and  the  reached  the  fulness  of  time,  to  them  have 
whole  of  Christianity  beforehand,  just  as  the  harbingers  of  Christ  appeared,  namely, 
they,  therefore,  had  the  spiritual  under-  the  ideas  proper  for  the  souls  of  children, 
standing  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  of  which  (the  ideas  or  notions)  it  mav  be 
some  degree  were  Christians  before  the  justly  said,  iliat  they  are  advantageous  for 
coming  of  Christ;  so  after  the  temporal  tlie  instructions  of  such  souls.  But  tlte 
appearance  of  Christ,    there  are   among   Son  himself,  the    Divine    Loijos,  in    his 

majesty  has  never  yet  appeared  to  them, 
because  he  awaits  that  preparation  which 
must  take  place  beforehand  among  the 
men  of  God,  who  are  to  l»e  capable  of 
receiving  his  Godhead.  We  must  also 
know,  that  as  there  is  a  law,  which  con- 
tains the  shadow  of  ffood  tilings  to  come, 


Christians,  persons  also,  by  whom  this 
spiritual  communion  with  the  Divine 
Logos  has  not  been  obtained,  and  they, 
like  the  Jews  of  old,  still  cling  to  the 
outward  covering  ;  and  the  saying  of  St. 
Paul  about  the  Jews  before  the  appear- 
ance of  Christianity,  (Gal.  iv. ;)  r/-.  '■'•That  ^  ^         ^ 

they  were  still  children,  that  the  time  ap-  |  which  good  things  are  revealed  (in  Chris- 
pointed  by  the  Father  for  them,  had  not  tianity)  by  the  preaching  of  the  true  law; 
yet  arrived,  and  that  thev  were  still  under  |  so  also  the  shadow  of  the  Christian  mvs- 


guardians  and  governors,"  is  still  appl 
being  in 


teries  is  represented  by  that  Gospel,  which 


cable  to  them,  as  being  in  a  condition  '  all,  who  read  it,  think  they  understand, 
through  which  they  must  necessarily  j  The  Gospel,  on  the  contrary-,  which  St. 
pass,  in  order  to  be  prepared  and  made  '  John  calls  an  eternal  Gospel,  and  which 
capable  of  receiving  the  true  spiritual  j  ought  properly  to  be  called  the  spiritual 
Christianity.  "  Every  soul,"  says  Origen,  j  Gospel,  sets  clearly  before   the  eyes  of 


"  which  enters  upon  childhood,  and  pro- 
ceeds on  the  road  towards  perfection, 
untU  the  time  destined  for  its  perfection 
shall  arrive,  requires  a  teacher,  and  guard- 
ians, and  stewards."* 

Whatever  portion  of  truth  there  may 
be  in  this  expression  of  Origen,  and  how- 
ever applicable  it  may  be  to  the  progress 


those,  who  understand  it,  every  thing 
which  regards  the  Son  of  God  himself; 
the  mysteries  which  were  shadowed  forth 
in  his  language,  and  the  things  of  which 
his  actions  yvere  the  symbols.  In  con- 
formity with  what  is  here  said,  we  must 
also  suppose  that,  as  there  is  an  outward 
Jew,  and    an    outward    circumcision,   so 


of    the    development   of    the    Christian   also  there  is  an  outward  Christian  and  an 
Church,  yet  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  the    outward    baptism."     Origen    here    scrip- 


meanmg  of  historical  Christianity,  the 
intimate  connection  between  historical 
and  inward  Christianity,  appear  to  be  ob- 
scured in  his  representation.  We  will 
now  hear  him  speak  in  his  own  words,! 
'"  We  must  know,  that  the  spiritual  ap- 
pearance of  Christ,  was  communicated 
before  his  personal  advent  to  the  perfect 
and  to  those  who  were  not  in  the  condi- 


turally  points  to  spiritual  communion 
with  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  source  of  sys- 
tematic and  lively  perception  of  that, 
which  is  only  hinted  at  in  Scripture;  and 
what  he  said,  was  certainly  just  when 
taken  as  said  in  opposition  to  a  blind  and 
narrow-liearted  zeal  for  an  orthodoxy 
which  adhered  merely  to  the  letter,  and  a 
conceited,  unprofitable  acquaintance  with 


tion  of  infants, — to  those,  who  were  no  j  Scripture;  but  such  declarations,  if  they 
longer  under  schoolmasters  and  guardians,  I  were  not  sufliciently  defined  and  limited, 
and  to  whom  the  spiritual  fulness  of  time  :  might  easily  favour  a  speculative  habit  of 
had  appeared,  namely,  the  Patriarchs,  Mo-;  dealing  arbitrarily  with  Scripture,  which, 
ses,  the  Servants  of  God,  and  the  Propliets, ;  under  the  pretence  of  a  higher  truth, 
who  had  seen  the  glory  of  Christ.  Now  myslilied  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel, 
just  as  he  himself,  before  his  visible  and  and  did  not  recognise  the  depth  which 
bodily  appearance,  appeared  to  the  per-  was  united  with  that  simplicity.  As  for 
feet,  thus  also  after  his  incarnation  has  instance  when  he  says,  ^  I  believe,  that 
been  preached  to  those  who  are  still  in  aj  the  whole  body  of  Holy  Writ,  even  when 
state  of  childhood,  because  they  are  under   uiulerstood  very  accurately,  conUiins  only 

- — a    very  small    part    of   the    elements    of 

Comm.  in  Matt  213.    jra«  ^W  W."'''' "^ '  Gnosis,  and  a  very  brief  introduction  to 


oiKovouaj  h-jU  iTiTP'.Traiv. 

I  Origen  in  Joh.  torn.  i.  p.  ix.  [p.  8,  9.  Ed 
Huet,  in  which,  however,  the  last  sentence  of  this 
quotation  is  imperfect. — H.  J.  R.] 


It."  Thus  in  his  allegorical  explanations 
of  die  conversation  with  the  Smnaritan 
woman,  the  well  of  Jacob  is  the  symbol 
of  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  the  living 
water  which  Jesus  gives,  is  the  symbol  of 


352 


LOGOS    REVEALED    IN    DIFFERENT   FORMS, 


that,  which  transcends  Scripture.  "  Scrip- 
ture is  then,"  he  says,  '•  the  introduction,  '• 
and  after  we  have  sufficiently  understood 
that,  we  must  raise  ourselves  up  to  Jesus  ' 
in  order  that  he  may  bestow  upon  us  the 
fountain  of  water  that  bubbleth  up  into 
eternal  life."* 

In  his  mind  this  theory  of  two  different  \ 
stages  of  Christianity  was  closely  con- 1 
nected  with  the  theory  of  different  forms 
of  the  Revelation  of  Christ,  or  of  the 
Divine  Logos,  in  relation  to  these  two 
different  conditions.  The  Gnostics,  in-  \ 
deed,  according  to  the  different  condi-  [ 
lions  of  the  spiritual  world,  by  reason  of 
the  difference  in  the  natures  of  men,  were 
accustomed  to  dividef  the  revealing  and  j 
the  redeeming  power  of  God  among  dif- ; 
ferent  hypostases;  they  acknowledged  a 
Monogenes,  a  Logos,  a  Soter,  an  uvu  and 
a  Kocru  Xfio-To;,  a  spiritual  and  a  natural  J  j 
Christ ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  Oiigen  the ' 
unity  of  the  being  of  Christ  and  of  his  ! 
Divine-human  appearance;  the  one  Christ ' 
is  every  thing  to  him,  he  only  appears  j 
under  different  predicates,  in  different 
modes  of  conception,  and  in  different  re- 
lations to  those,  to  whom  he  reveals  him- 
self, according  to  their  different  capacities, 
their  different  requirements;  and  hence  he 
appears  either  in  his  heavenly  dignity,  or 
his  human  state  of  abasement.  The 
thought  often  occurs  in  Origen,  "  that  the 
Redeemer  became  all  things  to  all  men  in 
a  more  Divine  sense  than  St.  Paul,  in  order 
to  win  all  men."§  "  The  Redeemer,"  he 
says,  "  becomes  much,  or  rather  perhaps, 
every  thing,  according  as  the  Avhole  crea- 
tion, which  is  to  be  released  by  him, 
happens  to  require  him."||  We  must 
separate  those  predicates,  which  belong 
to  the  Divine  word,  in  virtue  of  his  nature, 
as  the  eternal  Revealer  of  God  for  the 
■whole  spiritual  world,  and  the  source  of 


*  Tom.  13.  Joh.  p.  5  &  6.    [Ed.  Huet.  vol.  ii. 
p.  201,  2.— H.  J.  R.] 
\  See  Part  II. 

I  [Pneumati.schen  and  psyckischen  are  the 
German  terms,  which  are  here  opposed  as  in  St. 
Paul :  the  pneiimatical  meaning  spiritual  as  be- 
longing to  the  soul,  and  psi/chical  meaning  natu- 
ral as  required  only  to  the  animal  soul  or  life  of 
man. 

The  difference  between  the  Gnostic  view  and 
that  of  Origen,  may  be  shortly  stated  in  one  sen- 
tence. They  believed  in  an  ohjcclLvc  difference  in 
Christ's  nature,  and  he  only  in  a  subjective. — 
H.  J.  R.] 

§  Tom.  20.     Joh.  28. 

II  Tom.  1.  Joh.  22.  Where,  I  think,  instead 
of  it«fla^/^a,  we  must  read  xaQ'  a  xsi^^u  o-I'tm   >i 


all  truth  and  goodness,  from  those,  which 
he  has  taken  upon  him  for  the  advantage 
of  the  fallen  natures,  which  are  to  be  re- 
deemed by  him,  in  relation  to  the  different 
conditions  in  which  those  natures  are 
found.  "  Happy  are  they,"  says  Origen,* 
"  who  have  made  such  progress,  that  they 
need  the  Son  of  God  no  longer  as  their 
physician  that  heals  their  sick,  nor  as  the 
shepherd,  nor  as  their  redemption,  but 
require  him  only  as  truth,  as  the  Logos, 
as  righteousness,  and  whatsoever  he  is 
besides  to  those,  who  from  their  own 
perfection  are  able  to  conceive  him  in 
the  utmost  splendour."  Christianity  in  its 
historical  and  practical  form,  the  preach- 
ing of  Christ  crucified,  was  reckoned  by 
Origen  only  a  subordinate  condition, above 
which  he  placed  the  wisdom  of  the  per- 
fect, which  acknowledged  Christ  no  longer 
in  the  condition  of  a  servant,  but  in  his 
dignity  as  the  Divine  Logos,  although  he 
recognised  the  former  condition  as  a  ne- 
cessary preparatory  stage,  in  order  to 
ascend  ft-om  the  temporal  to  the  eternal 
Revelation  of  God,  in  order  that  a  man 
being  purified  through  faith  in  the  cruci- 
fied Redeemer,  and  sanctified  by  the  fol- 
lowing after  the  Son  of  God  who  appeared 
in  human  form,  should  be  rendered  ca- 
pable of  receiving  the  spiritual  communi- 
cations of  his  Divine  Being.  "If  thou 
canst  understand,"  says  Origen,|  "  the 
differences  in  the  Divine  Avord,  according 
as  it  is  announced  in  the  foolishness  of 
preaching,  or  brought  forward  in  wisdom 
to  the  perfect,  then  you  will  see  in  what 
manner  the  Divine  word  has  the  form  of 
a  servant  to  novices  in  Christianity  .... 
but  it  comes  in  the  glory  of  the  Father  to 
the  perfect,  who  are  able  to  say, '  we  have 
seen  his  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  the  Father,  full  of  grace 
and  truth ;'  for  to  the  perfect  the  glory  of 
the  Word  appears,  as  well  as  his  being 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  the  Father,  and 
his  being  full  of  grace  and  truth  also, 
which  they  are  unable  to  comprehend, 
who  require  the  foolishness  of  preaching 
to  induce  them  to  lielieve."  In  another 
passage,!  he  says,  '^  To  those,  who  live 
in  the  flesh,  he  becomes  flesh;  but  to 
those  who  walk  no  longer  after  the  flesh, 
he  appears  as  the  Divine  Logos,  who  was 
in  the  beginning  with  the  Father,  and  he 
reveals  the  Father  to  thorn."  He  says  of 
that  preparatory  stage  of  belief,§  "  If  any 


•  Joh.  i.  22. 

f  In  Matt.  p.  290.  Ed.  Huet. 
t  Commentar.  in  Matt.  p.  268. 
§  In  Joh.  i.  0.11.  [1] 


AGAINST    DESPISING    THE    SIMPLE. 


353 


one  also  belongs  to  the  class  of  the  Co- 
rinthians, among  whom  Paul  will  know 
nothing  except  the  crucilied  Jesus,  and 
whom  he  teaches  to  acknowledge  only 
him  who  became  man  for  our  sakes,  yet 
he  may  by  means  of  the  man  Jesus  be- 
come a  man  of  God,  by  the  consequences 
of  his  death  may  die  to  sin,  and  by  con- 
sequences of  his  resurrection  may  rise  up 
to  a  Divine  life."  So  that  Origen  re- 
verenced even  that  subordinate  condition, 
and  he  desired  that  the  Gnostics  would 
let  themselves  down*  to  the  weakness  of 
those  Avho  v.ere  placed  in  it,  and  avoid 
giving  them  oflence  and  occasions  of  bit- 
terness. "  Just  as  Paul,"  he  says,  "  could 
not  be  of  service  to  those  who  were  Jews 
according  to  the  flesh,  if  he  had  not, 
when  he  had  good  reasons  for  his  con- 
duct, caused  Tinioihy  to  be  circumcised, 
shorn  his  own  hair,  offered  sacrifices,  and 
became  a  Jew  to  Jews,  in  order  to  gain 
the  Jews ;  so  also  he,  who  is  inclined  to  be 
useful  to  many,  cannot  improve  those  who 
are  still  in  the  school  of  sensuous  Chris- 
tianity, by  spiritual  Christianity  alone, 
nor  lead  them  thus  to  a  higher  and  better 
state,  and  he  must,  therefore,  unite  spi- 
ritual and  sensuous  Christianity  together.| 
And  where  it  is  necessary  to  preach  the 
sensuous  Gospel,  in  virtue  of  which  among 
carnal  men  he  can  know  nothing,^  but 
Christ  crucilied,  lie  must  also  do  this. 
But  when  they  are  grounded  in  the  faith 
and  continue  to  bring  forth  fruit  in  the 
Spirit,  then  must  we  bring  forward  to 
them  the  word,  which,  having  appeared 
among  men,  has  raised  itself  again  to 
that,  which  it  was  with  God  in  the  be- 
ginning."§  Thus  too,  in  his  allegorical 
interpretation  and  application  of  Matt.  xiv. 
10,11  after  he  has  deduced  from  the  pas- 
sage, that  a  man  must  become  a  child  to 
children,  in  order  to  gain  children  to  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven,  just  as  Christ,  though 
he  was  in  a  Divine  form,  became  a  child, 


*  Thus  also  Clement  on  the  oIkcvojui*  of  the 
Gnostic.  Stromal,  vii.  p.  730.  [Potter,  p.  863,864. 
Sylb.  p.  310.  Klotz,  vol.  iii.  p.  246,  247.]  Comp. 
the  notions  of  Philo  given  above,  vol.  i.  p.  73,  &c. 

i  [It  is  difficult  to  imagine  a  text  more  tortured 
in  its  application  than  this  passage.  It  was  writ- 
ten to  show  that  the  knowledge  of  Christ  crucified, 
whereby  we  are  led  to  righteousness  and  to  heaven, 
transcends  all  other  knowledge,  which  St.  Paul 
casts  away  in  comparison  of  it — it  is  applied  to 
degrade  that  doctrine  of  Christ  crucified,  in  com- 
parison of  other  doctrines  and  revelations  of  the 
same  Christianity. — H.  J.  R.J 

§  Tom.  i.  in  Joh.  p.  9. 

U  In  Matt.  1.  c.  374,  37.'j. 
45 


j  he  says  beautifully,  '*  We  must  be  well 
[aware  of  this,  in  order  that  we  may  not, 
lout  of  a  presumption  of  wisdom  and  ad- 
j  vancement,  as  great  ones  in  the  Church, 
j  despise  the  little  ones,  and  children,  but 
inasmucii  as  we  know  tliat  it  is  said, '  Of 
:  such  is  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,'  we  ought 
i  to  become  such  men,  that  through  us  the 
salvation  of  children  may  be  promoted. 
I  We  must  not  only  not  hinder  such  from 
I  being  brought  to  Christ,  but  we  must  do 
his  will  by  becoming  children  with  chil- 
dren, so  that  when  those  children  arrive  at 
salvation,  through  us,  who  have  become 
children,  we  may  be  exalted  by  God,  as 
men  who  have  abased  themselves."  Ori- 
gen here  blames  those,  who,  like  the 
Gnostics,  despised  ordinary  preachers  and 
;  teachers,  who  were  destitute  of  spiritual 
culture  of  the  higher  order,  and  wiio  j)re- 
j  sented  the  simple  Gospel  in  an  unattractive 
[form,  just  as  if  such  persons  did  some- 
thing unworthy  of  so  great  a  Saviour  and 
j  master.*  "  Even  if  we  were  arrived  at 
'  the  very  highest  and  clearest  perception 
[anschauung]  of  the  Logos  and  of  truth," 
says  Origen,t  "  yet  still  we  must  not 
i  wholly  forget  the  passion  of  Christ,  for 
;  it  is  to  that  we  owe  our  introduction  into 
I  this  higher  life  during  our  abode  on 
! earth." 

j      With  this  twofold  condition,  namely, 
that  of  spiritual,  and    that  of  sensuous 
j  Christianity,  the  theory  of  a  twofold  con- 
dition of  Scriptural  interpretation  and  the 
theory  of  different  senses  of  Holy  Writ 
j  were    closely    connected,    for    spiiitual 
I  Christianity  brought  with  it  a  penetration 
into  the  spirit  of  Scripture,  and  an  under- 
standing of  tlie  eternal,  spiritual  Gospel, 
just  as,  on  the  contrary,  sensuous  Chris- 
tianity abided  by  the  letter  of  Scripture 
alone.     The  highest  problem  of  Scripture 
interpretation  was  in  his  estimation  the 
changing  of  the  sensuous  Gospel  into  the 
I  spiritual,t    just    as   the    highest   aim    of 
!  Christianity  was  to  elevate  itself  from  the 
j  earthly  appearance  of  the  incarnate  Logos 
!  to  communion  with  him  and  to  the  con- 
templation of  his   Divine  nature.     Thus 
he  saw  also  in  the  whole  body  of  Scripture 
a  letting  down  of  the  overwhelming  liea- 
venly  Spirit  to   the   human  form,  which 
was  incapable  of  containing  it ;  a  letting 
down  of  the  Divine  Teacher  of  man  to 


*   j8x«T«Ta>  oiv  T/c  rnnc  ran  tTraty^'OJ^i/uftiiiv  KtTtt- 


fjtcepit  Tcu  K'^7/ui:u  K:tJ 


Tat  't^:uJtyauo3i  ; 


f  Tom.  ii.  Joh.  p.  4.  [1] 

i    TO     /unoLKaiSur    TO    tti<rfl«TS»     fwatJJIWci'    lie    T» 
'  TnejuiniK'.i. 

2  g2 


HOW    GOD    REVEALS    AND    HIDES    HIMSELF. 


351 

the  weakness  and  the  wants  of  men,  and 
all  Scripture  was  in  like  manner  a  revela- 
tion of  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos. 
Thus  he  says,*  "  AH  which  is  here  called 
Word  of  God,  is  a  revelation  of  the  Divine 
Word,  which  became  flesh  and  emptied  j 
itself  in  relation  to  its  heavenly  natnre,  | 
and  hence  we  see  the  Word  of  God  on  I 
earth  when  he  became  man,  as  a  human  | 
Word,  for  the  Word  constantly  becomes  j 
flesh  in  Scripture,  in  order  to  dwell  among 
lis."!"  But  when  we  have  lien  on  tlie  \ 
breast  of  the  Word  that  became  man,  and 
are  enabled  to  follow  him  as  he  climbs  up 
the  high  hill,  (Matt,  xvii.)  then  we  may  say, 
'  we  have  seen  his  glory,'  "j  He  sets  out 
from  the  principle  of  an  analogy  between 
the  Holy  Scripture  as  a  work  of  God,  and 
the  whole  creation  which  proceeds  from 
the  same  God  ;  a  principle,  which  carried 
out  in  his  lively  and  spiritual  manner, 
would  at  once  become  fruitful  for  the 
right  consideration  of  the  twofold  revela- 
tion of  God.  Thus  he  says,  and  the  say- 
ing shows  at  once  how  thoroughly  im- 
bued he  was  with  the  notion  that  the 
Holy  Scripture  is  the  Word  of  God:§ 
"  We  need  not  think  it  strange,  if  in  every 
passage  of  Holy  Writ  the  superhuman 
nature  of  the  thought  does  not  strike  the 
unlearned,  for  in  the  works  of  Providence, 
which  extend  over  tlie  whole  universe, 
some  of  them  show  manifestly,  that  they 
are  the  works  of  Providence,  while  others 
as  so  concealed,  as  to  give  occasion  to 
incredulity  in  respect  to  God  who  governs 
all    things  with    inexpressible   skill    and 

power But  just  as  we  do 

not  dispute  the  doctrine  of  a  Providence, || 
on  account  of  those  things  of  which  we 
are  ignorant,  when  once  we  are  justly 
persuaded  of  his  existence,  so  we  cannot 
doubt  of  the  Divine  authority  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  which  extends  to  every  por- 
tion of  them,  because  our  weakness  is 
unable  in  every  case  to  come  up  to  tiie 
hidden  glory  of  their  doctrines,  which  is 
clothed  in  inadequate  language,  for  we 

*  See  Philocal.  c.  15. 

■j-  Similarly  also  Clement  says,  that  the  charac- 
ter of  the  Holy  Scripture  is  a  parabolical  one,  as 
also  the  whole  appearance  of  ("hrist  is  a  parabo- 
lical   one — viz.    the   Divine  in    an   earthly   garb, 

ixBiv-     Stromat.  vi.  677. 

i  The  ennobling  of  Scripture  for  him,  who 
learns  to  understand  its  spirit  by  a  living  commu- 
nion with  Christ. 

§  Philocal.  c.  i.  p.  10.  [p.  5.  Ed.  Spencer, 
1/558.— n.  J.  K.] 


have  the  treasure  in  earthen  vessels." 
And  in  another  passage  he  says  :*  "  He 
who  once  admits  that  these  Scriptures  are 
the  work  of  the  Creator  of  the  world, 
must  be  persuaded,  that  whatsoever  phe- 
nomena in  regard  to  the  creation  present 
themselves  to  those  who  attempt  to  give 
an  account  of  it,  the  same  will  also  occur 
to  him  who  inquires  about  the  Scriptures. 
There  are  now,  for  instance,  in  Scripture 
many  things  which  human  nature  may- 
find  diflicult,  or  be  unable  to  explain,  but 
we  are  not  on  that  account,  to  accuse  the 
Creator  of  the  Universe  ;  as  for  example, 
wlien  we  are  unable  to  explain  the  cause 
why  basilisks  and  other  poisonous  animals 
were  created;  for  here  it  is  the  duty  of  a 
pious  mind,  taking  into  consideration  the 
weakness  of  man,  and  hovv  it  is  impos- 
sible fully  to  understand  the  creating  wis- 
dom of  God,  to  reserve  to  God  the  know- 
ledge of  such  tilings,  and  he  will  after- 
wards, when  we  are  considered  worthy 
of  it,  reveal  to  us  that,  about  which  we 
have  doubted  in  reverence."  How  full 
he  was  of  the  belief  in  a  Divine  Spirit 
which  breathed  throughout  the  whole  of 
Scripture,  and  how  thoroughly  persuaded 
he  was  tliat  this  could  be  received  only 
with  an  humble  and  a  believing  heart,  is 
beautifully  expressed  in  the  foUoAving 
words  of  Origen  :t  "  We  must  believe 
that  no  title  of  Holy  Scripture  is  deficient 
in  the  wisdom  of  God,  for  He,  who  pro- 
claimed to  man,  '  Thou  shall  not  appear 
empty  before  me,'  (Exod.  xxxiv.,)  will 
himself  far  less  utter  any  empty  word  ; 
for  the  prophets  take  what  they  say,  out 
of  his  fulness  ;  therefore,  all  parts  are  ani- 
mated {lit.  breathe)  by  this  fulness,  and 
there  is  nothing  in  the  Prophets,  the  Law. 
or  the  Gospel,  or  the  Apostolic  Epistles, 
which  does  not  proceed  from  this  fulness. 
The  breath,  therefore,  of  this  fulness  (•3-X»- 
fw^a,  Pleroma,)  descends  on  those  who 
have  eyes,  to  see  the  revelations  of  the 
Divine  fulness,  ears  to  hear  it,  and  a  sense 
to  catch  the  sweet  smelling  savour,  which 
proceeds  from  this  fulness.  But  if,  i« 
reading  Scripture,  you  meet  with  a  thought 
which,  so  to  speak,  is  a  stone  of  stumb- 
ling and  a  rock  of  oflence,  blame  your- 
self, for  be  assured,  that  this  stone  of 
stumbling  contains  thoughts,  by  which 
that  saying  shall  come  to  pass,  '  He  that 
beUeveth  shall  not  be  put  to  shame,  (Rom. 


•  Philocal.  c.  ii.  p.  61.  [p.  23.  Ed.  Spencer.— 
II.  J.  R.] 

+  Ii.  c.  c.  i.  p.  51.  [p.  19,  20.  Ed.  Spencer.— 
II.  J.  K.] 


THREEFOLD     SENSE     OF    SCRIPTURE. 


X.  11.)  Believe  first,  and  you  shall  then 
find  much  holy  assistance  and  support 
under  that  which  appeared  to  you  an 
ofience." 

But  however  just  this  principle  of 
Origen  might  be,  yet  in  the  application 
of  it  he  was  led  astray  by  means  of  the 
false  position,  from  which  he  viewed  the 
spirit  and  the  object  of  Holy  Scripture, 
and  of  all  Divine  revelation  through  tiie 
Word ;  and  this  false  position  was  inti- 
mately connected  with  his  false  concep- 
tion of  the  relation  between  faith  and 
Gnosis  (wiiTTij  and  yvws-i?.)  In  both 
respects  he  was  led  astray  by  the  specu- 
lative point  of  view,  Avhich  was  too  pre- 
valent, inasmuch  as  he  did  not  sufficiently 
distinguish  the  nature  of  a  Christian  sys- 
tem of  faith,  and  a  Christian  pliilosophy 
from  each  other,  and  he  did  not  keep 
sufficiently  before  his  sight  the  essentially 
practical  object  of  all  Divine  revelations, 
and  especially  of  Christianity.  He  did 
not  refer  every  thing  to  the  one  object, 
that  affects  all  mankind — redemption,  re- 
generation, sanctification,  and  the  bless- 
ings resulting  from  them ;  but  the  prac- 
tical object  of  man's  improvement  was, 
in  his  estimation,  only  a  subordinate  one, 
which  was  chiefly  of  use  to  the  great 
mass  of  believers,  who  were  incapable  of 
receiving  any  thing  of  higher  character. 
In  his  estimation,  the  hiirhest  object  was 
the  specidative,  the  communicating  the 
most  elevated  truths  to  spiritual  men  who 
were  capable  of  understanding  them,  i.e. 
to  the  Gnostics.  These  hitrher  truths 
have  reference  chiefly  to  the  following 
points:*  *•' About  God — about  the  nature 
of  his  only  begotten  Son,  and  the  mode 
in  which  he  is  the  Son  of  God — about 
the  cause  which  impelled  him  to  come 
down  and  take  upon  him  the  nature  of 
man — about  the  ctTects  of  this  incarna- 
tion, whom  it  affects — about  the  higher 
kinds  of  reasonable  beings  who  have 
fallen  from  a  state  of  happiness,  and  the 
causes  of  their  fall — about  the  difference 
of  souls,  and  whence  this  difference 
arises — what  the  world  is,  and  wherefore 
it  was  created — why  there  is  so  much 
evil  in  the  earth,  and  whether  evil  is 
found  only  there,  or  elsewhere  also." 
As  Origen  made  it  the  chief  object  to  find 
explanations  and  answers  to  these  in- 
quiries ;  many  parts  of  Scripture,  if  he 
abided  by  their  natural  interpretation, 
would  naturally  appear  to  him  to  be  un- 
fruitful towards  that  which  he  considered 


355 

its  essential  object.  All  narratives  cm- 
bracing  only  earthly  occurrences,  all  legis- 
lation bearnig  only  on  earthly  rclatiorjs, 
he  explained  as  being  only  the  symbolical 
guise  of  a  higher  history  of  the  world  of 
Spirits;  and  of  higher  laws  which  related 
also  to  that  world.  Thus  the  higher  and 
the  subordinate  object  of  Scripture  would 
be  united  together,  and  the  revelation  of 
the  higher  class  of  truth  would  be  hidden 
in  a  literal  form,  adapted  to  the  improve- 
ment of  the  general  mass  of  mankind. 
"The  mulliiiule  of  genuine  and  simple 
believers,"  says  Origen,  "•  bears  testimony 
to  the  usefulness,  even  of  this  inferior 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures."  Be- 
tween these  two  kind  of  senses  included 
in  Scipture,  Origen  imagined  an  inter- 
mediate kind,  an  allegorical  sense  adapted 
for  those  who  had  not  yet  arrived  at  that 
higher  state  of  spiritual  perception  ;  this 
was  a  general,  moral,  and  instructive  ap- 
plication of  those  passages  of  Scripture, 
which  relate  to  individual  cases,  though 
this  application  was  not  of  that  elevated 
and  profound  class;*  and  he  adduces 
as  examples  of  this,  the  explanation  of 
1  Cor.  ix.  9;  and  most  of  the  allegorical 
interpretations  of  Scripture  then  com- 
monly used,  even  in  the  instruction  of  the 
people.  Thus,  the  triple  sense  of  Scrip- 
ture corresponded  to  the  three  parts  of 
man's  nature,  which  the  theory  of  Origoti 
acknowledged;  that  which  is  really  Divine 
in  man,  the  Spirit,  which  is  directed 
towards  the  Eternal,  and  finds  its  proper 
life  in  the  perception  ami  contemplation 
of  Divine  things  ;  the  Soul,  whose  sphere 
of  action  is  the  temporal  and  the  finite; 
and  the  Bodi/.  While  Philo  agreed  with 
Origen  in  the  essential  and  fundamental 
features  of  his  view,  he  (Origen)  sought 
also  on  the  whole  to  preserve  the  objec- 
tive truth  of  the  literal  and  historical  con- 
tents of  the  Scriptures,!  which  are  given 
as  the  dress  in  which  the  spiritual  reve- 
lations are  communicated.  And  yet,  he 
formed  passages  where  the  letter  could 
not,  in  his  opinion,  be  defended;  because 
he  was  destitute  of  right  hermeneutic 
principles,  and  of  other  necessary  helps 
and  aids;  or  because  he  did  not  know 
hovv  to  separate  the  divine  from  the  hu- 
man  in    the    Holy  Scriptures ;;{:  or  else, 


*  [As  in  tlie  hisihor  chss  of  interpretation, 
which  he  iiniiGjiiiod. — H.  J.  R.] 

I  T3  a-iefXJiTix..Y  Til"/  y^i-pay,  to  iyiufxt  ray  ttw- 
fji-j-Tiitaiv. 

+  As,  for  exariiiile,  wlicre  he  found  it  impf)s<!ihle 
to  maintain  the  literal  truth  of  the  history  of  Ilri.ih, 
Philocal.  i.  28.  [p.  II,  Ed.  Spencer.— H.J.  R.]  '  because  in   David  he  saw  only  the  man  inspired 


m^. 


because  (which  is  connected  with  the 
remark  we  have  just  made,)  proceeding 
from  an  exaggerated  notion  of  inspiration, 
he  could  not  entertain  the  supposition  of 
any  contradiction  in  Scripture,  even  in 
unimportant  things  ;  and  then,  lie  thought 
the  only  way  to  clear  up  the  difficulties 
was  by  a  spiritual  interpretation.*  And, 
like  Philo,  he  united  the  supposition  with 
his  reverence  for  the  Holy  Scripture 
in  such  a  manner,  as  to  induce  him  to 
say,  that  tliese  things,  the  literal  accepta- 
tion of  which  cannot  be  maintained — this 
mythical  guise  in  which  the  higher  wisdom 
is  clothed — were  strewed  purposely  about 
as  a  stone  of  stumbling,|  in  order  to  ex- 
cite deeper  inquiry. 

These  principles  Origen  applied  not 
only  to  the  Old  Testament,  but  expressly 
to  the  New  ;  and  expressly  to  the  Gospel 
history  .J  Thus  he  imagined  that  he  was 
able  to  clear  up  many  difficulties,  by  sup- 
posing, that  the  apostles  represented§ 
under  the  outward  form  of  various  mat- 
ters of  fact,  what  they  had  to  say  of  a 
difference  in  the  operations  of  the  Divine 
Logos. II  This  principle  of  interpretation, 
it  must  be  avowed,  gave  an  opportunity 
for  the  exercise  of  every  kind  of  sub- 
jective caprice,  and  was  liable  to  make 
historical  Christianity  entirely  a  thing  of 
naught;  as  everyone  could  thus  place 
whatever  did  not  suit  his  subjective  ideas 
and  feelings,  in  the  class  of  those  things 
which  were  not  to  be  taken  literally. 
Origen  felt  with  much  force,  what  danger 
might  arise  from  this  to  objective  Chris- 
tianity ;  and  he,  therefore,  always  de- 
clared, that  for  the  most  part  the  spirit 
and  the  letter  were  both  alike  to  be  main- 


ms    PIETY    EVEN    IN    HIS    ERRORS. 


by  the  Spirit  of  Go<],  and  not  a  frail  and  sinful 
man. 

*    dtvsLyaiyit  ii;  ro  voutov. 

i  See  the  passage  of  the  Philocalia  quoted 
above;  and  also  c.  xv,  p.  139. 

§   T.    X.    Joh.  p.   4.     TTfcimino  ttlirou;,  ottov  fAiV 

in^Ct'e^ll     i?i!lSlUilV     TrviU/tA'JiTllCCi!;     afAO.     KXt    <TU>/UArlna);, 

rev  a-ctuu-Tix^u,  irai^o/uivcu  ttoKKx^ii;  tou  c'a;i9:i/?  ttvsj- 

II  Of  different  communications  of  the  iTrihjuitA 
VJXTJ)   T6y  Xplo'rcu. 

[N.  13.  In  a  passage  requiring  some  delicacy 
of  touch  in  translating,  I  have  used  the  word  out- 
ward for  si7inMch,  as  I  thought  it  gave  the  nearest 
idea  to  the  EngHsh  reader.  The  imSii^ui^  ctla-(l>n>i, 
or  the  abode  (f  the  Logos  with  us  which  could  be 
perceived  by  the  smses,  was  only  the  type  of  the 
iTriJu/jtix  vcxTX,  the  sojourn  of  the  Logos  or  of 
Christ  in  the  spirit  of  man.  This  was  ex- 
plained above,  p.  350,  a  reference  to  which  will  be 
of  service  in  considering  this  passage. — H.  J.  R.] 


tained,  and  that  the  letter  was  to  be  aban- 
doned only  after  careful  examination. 
But  where  were  there  any  certain  limits  ?■ 

And  yet,  we  cannot  but  acknowledge, 
that  in  Origen  the  caprice  so  prejudical  to 
objective  Christianity,  which  might  pro- 
ceed from  those  principles,  was  softened 
down  by  the  intimately  pious  and  be- 
lieving feeling,  which  animated  him,  and 
the  thorough  sense  of  the  historical  truth 
of  Christianity  with  which  he  was  im- 
pressed. And  we  must  also  take  care  to 
remark,  how  truth  and  error  here  were 
mingled  together  in  a  manner,  wiiich  must 
be  explained  by  taking  into  consideration 
the  peculiarities  of  his  own  character,  and 
his  relation  to  his  own  times,  which  were 
then  agitated  by  a  variety  of  contradictory 
opinions.  He  saw  how  carnally-minded 
Jews,  cleaving  to  the  letter  of  the  Old 
Testament,  were  unable  to  attain  to  a 
faith  in  the  Gospel  ;  how  carnally-minded 
Ciiristians  by  that  disposition  too  were 
led  to  rude  conceptions  [lit.  representa- 
tions) of  God  and  divine  things.  He  saw 
how  anti-Jewish  Gnostics,  in  conse- 
quence of  this  very  mode  of  conception 
of  the  Old  Testament,  fell, into  the  other 
error ;  so  that  they  would  not  recognise 
this  God,  who  appeared  thus  carnally  re- 
presented (i.  e.  in  the  Old  Testament,)  as 
the  God  of  the  Gospel ;  which  circum- 
stance was  an  mtroduction  for  their  whole 
system  of  Dualism.  Now  Origen  believed 
that  he  should  be  able,  by  means  of  this 
spiritualizing  mode  of  interpretation,  to 
tear  up  all  these  contradictory  errors  by 
the  very  roots.*  He  had  not  in  this  the 
smallest  intention  of  degrading  that  which 
is  Divine  in  Scripture  into  something 
human ;  but  he  was  more  inclined  to 
go  too  far  on  the  other  side,  by  not  re- 
cognising in  that  which  was  Divine,  that 
which  was  properly  and  peculiarly  htman 
in  the  mode  in  which  it  was  brought  for- 
ward ;  because,  in  accordance  with  the 
general  notions  of  that  time,  he  deduced 
throughout  Scripture  both  form  and  mat- 
ter from  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  Divine  Spirit — such  was  the  belief 
of  Origen — had  so  completely  acted  in 
reference  to  the  higher  wisdom,  that  in 
many  passages  the  spirit  was  given  with- 
out the  letter. 

It  must,  however,  be  confessed,  that  the 


*  After  mentioning  all  these  errors,  he  says, 
Philocalia,  c;  i.  p.  1 7,  aWt^  Si  tt-jlo-i  toic  Tr^ode^iifxtyoK; 
■^iuScjSo^kdv  xAi  da-tfiiUifV  «  IJiceTUtev  tti^i  Gm  Ko-yaiv  ovk. 


DOCTRINES    ABOUT   GOD. 


357 


Alexandrian  turn  of  mind,  if  carried  to  the 
extreme,  without  any  counter  action,  and 
without  the  spirit  of  piety  which  imbued 
an  Orio'en  and  a  Clement,  might  lead  to 
an  Idealism,  entirely  subversive  of  all  that 
is  historical  and  objective  in  Christianity; 
and  then,  as  the  struggles  which  the  Ori- 
genian  school  had  to  undergo  at  the  end 
of  this  period  indicate,  we  must  look  es- 
pecially to  the  realistic  tendency,  which 
proceeded  from  the  Western  Church,  for 
a  counterbalancing  power  to  meet  that 
idealism ;  just  as  the  Origenian  school 
was  calculated  to  be  efficacious  in  spirit- 
ualizing that  Church.  Such  is  the  general 
picture  of  the  relation  which  existed  be- 
tween the  most  remarkable  and  differing 
dispositions  of  mind ;  a  picture,  which 
we  shall  be  sure  to  find  again  in  the 
different  modes  of  treating  the  chief  points 
of  Christian  doctrine  singly,  just  as  this 
consideration  will  give  us  a  proof,  that, 
even  in  the  fundamental  truths  of  Chris- 
tianity, these  two  dispositions,  notwith- 
standing their  opposite  nature,  must  touch 
each  other  and  join  together. 

II.   The  Developemcnt  nf  the  g^rcat  (hdrines 
cf  Christiaaitij  considered  separately. 

We  must  always  bear  in  mind,  that 
Christianity  did  not  deliver  to  man  isolated 
speculative  ideas*  of  God  and  Divine 
things,  nor  a  ready  made  dogmatic  sys- 
tem in  a  settled  form,  but  announced  the 
facts  of  a  communication  made  by  God  to 
man,  through  which  man  became  placed 
in  a  new  relation  to  his  Creator,  by  the 
recognition  and  application!  of  which  an 
entirely  new  direction  and  formation  of 
the  religious  feelings  might  be  produced, 
through  which  all  that  was  before  con- 
tained in  it  would  receive  an  alteration 
and  modification.  The  fact  of  the  re- 
demption of  sinful  man  by  Christ,  forms 
the  central  point  of  Christianity,  and 
from  the  influence  which  the  application 
of  this  fact  to  the  heart  must  produce  on 
the  inward  life  of  man,  this  new  form  or 
condition    of    the   religious     conscience 


•  [Erkenntuisse.  Like  other  words  belonging 
to  the  metaphysical  vocalmlary  of  Germany,  this 
word  is  almost  untranslatable.  '  Cognitions'  would 
be  the  nearest  if  we  had  the  word.  It  expresses 
rather  the  ackmivledqment  of  an  idea  to  our  own 
consciousness  than  the  ideas  themselves.  The  re- 
presentations  of  the  mind  (vorstellungen)  are  iU 
ideas,  our  erkeiintnisse  are  our  knowledge  of  these 
ideas.  See  the  Conversations  Lexicon  on  the 
■word.  See  Edinburgh  Review,  Oct.  1832,  p.  173. 
— H.  J.  R.] 

f  [Aneignung.  UtenWy,  apprnpnatton ;  i.e. 
application  to  the  heart. — H.  J.  R.] 


arises,  and  from  this  again  there  results  a 
new  state  of  thought  about  Divine  tilings, 
which  reflects  the  new  world  formed 
within.  The  characteristic  by  which  the 
Christiannatureof  any  thing  is  determined, 
depends  on  its  connection  with  this, 
which  forms  the  essential  and  fnndament;il 
ground  of  Christianity,  according  to  the 
manner  in  which  dogmatic  systems  and 
individual  opinions  are  in  relation  to  this 
one  doctrine,  so  will  be  their  relation  to 
Christianity  in  general,  and  in  the  same 
manner  we  must  estimate  the  importance 
or  nonimportance  of  errors  as  far  as  their 
efforts  on  Christian  practice  are  concerned. 
If  from  the  beginning  men  had  clearly 
conceived  this  relation  of  insulated  doc- 
trines to  the  centrepoint  of  Christianity, 
and  maintained  a  full  consciousness  of  it, 
it  would  have  been  more  easy  for  them 
to  come  to  an  understanding  as  to  unity 
in  that  which  forms  the  essential  nature 
of  Christianity,  and  this  unity  would  not 
have  been  so  easily  destroyed  by  differ- 
ences in  speculative  conceptions, to  which 
they  attached  in  early  times  too  much 
weight,  exactly  because  they  were  un- 
acquainted with  the  true  measure  for  es- 
timating in  what  Christianity*  consists. 

Even  the  common  God-consciousness, 
the  consciousness  of  the  God,  in  whom 
we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being,  re- 
ceived a  new  impulse  from  Christianity  \ 
the  believer  who  lived  in  God  became 
filled  with  a  new  feeling  of  the  undenia- 
bleness  of  God,  and  even  in  Nature,  he, 
on  whom  inward  communion  with  God 
had  been  bestowed  through  Christ,  felt 
the  Omnipresence  of  a  God,  who  filleth 
all  things,  with  more  liveliness  and  greater 
force.  While  those  Fathers,  who  in  early 
life  had  been  devoted  to  the  Platonic  Phi- 
losophy, and  had  received  through  its 
influence  the  shape  of  their  mind  and 
the  form  of  their  knowledge,  developed 
under  this  form  their  Christian  God-con- 
sciousness, Tertullian,  on  the  contrary, 
expressed  in  the  original  but  uncultivated 
form  of  his  powerfid  and  rugged  pecu- 
liarity, that  Avilh  which  the  animation  of 
an  inward  deep  Christian  God-conscious- 
uesst  inspired  him.     On   the  whole,  al- 


•  [Literally,  'for  the  estimation  of  all  which  is 
Christian,'  meaning,  how  fiir  any  doctrine  is  es- 
sentially Christian  or  not.  As  I  am  scrupulous 
about  paraphrasing.  I  wish  my  readers  to  know 
exactly  the  force  of  the  idioms  which  I  cannot 
render  literally.— H.  J.  R.] 

+  [Gottesbowusstseyn.  Go<l-consciousne33.  I 
have  used  this  new  word  merely  to  express  the 
German  term,  which  conveys  the   idea  of  "an 


358 


though  the  fathers  had  not  to  contend 
with  Atheists,  yet  their  controversial 
treatises  against  superstUious  men  and 
idolaters  often  took  such  a  turn,  as  might 
have  been  directed  against  atheists  also. 
Instead  of  endeavouring  to  prove  the  ex- 
istence of  God  by  logical  inference,*  they 
appealed  to  that  which  is  most  immediate 
in  the  human  spirit,  and  is  antecedant  to 
all  proof,  they  appealed  to  the  originally- 
implanted  consciousness  [of  God]  which 
human  nature  cannot  deny  :  they  ap- 
pealed to  an  original  revelation  of  the 
one  God,  made  to  the  human  spirit,  on 
wliich  every  other  revelation  of  God  is 
founded.  Clement  appealed  to  the  fact, 
that  every  scientific  proof  presupposes 
something  which  is  not  proved,  which 
can  be  conceived  only  through  an  im- 
mediate agency  on  the  spirit  of  man. 
He  says,t  "  To  the  Supreme,  the  sim- 
ple Being,  and  the  Being  elevated  above 
all  matter,  faith  alone  can  raise  itself." 
Therefore,  he  says,  there  can  be  any 
knowledge  or  perception  of  God,  only 
in  as  far  as  he  himself  has  revealed 
himself  to  man.  God  cannot  be  con- 
ceived by  means  of  demonstrative  know- 
ledge, for  this  proceeds  only  from  things 
previously  acknowledged,  and  more  known 
[to  other  things  which  are  less  known] 
but  nothing  can  be  prior  to  the  Eternal, 
and  hence  it  results,  that  it  is  only  by 
Divine  grace,  and  by  the  revelation  of  his 
eternal  word,  that  we  can  recognise  the 
unknown;  and  then  he  introduces  the 
words  which  Paul  spoke  at  Athens,  with 
reference  to  the  knowledge  of  the  un- 
known God.J  And  in  another  passage 
also,^  he  says,  "The  first  Cause  is 
above  space,  and  time,  and  name,  and 
conception.  Therefore,  Moses  says  to 
God,  '  Reveal  thyself  to  me,'  (Exod. 
xxxiii.  18,)  most  clearly  pointing  out, 
that  no  man  can  either  teach  or  express 
what  God  is,  but  he  can  make  himself 
known  only  by  liis  own  power."  He 
recognises  also  in  all  men  an  outpouring 
from  God,  a  Divine  seed,||  through  whicli 
lliey  are  impelled,  even  against  their  own 


CLEMENT. — THEOPHILUS. 


inward  recognition  of  God's  existence,  and  a  sense 
of  his  presence  and  operations,"  a  mnschusness 
of  his  existence  and  agency.— H.  J.  K.] 

*  [/.  e.  The  a  posteriori  argument,  or  the  argu- 
ment of  design. — H.  J.  K.] 

f  ii.  364.   [yylh.  1.57.  Pott.  435.1 

t  V.  588.  [Ed.  Potter,  696.  Sylb.  p.  251. 
Klotz,  iii.  p.  60.— II.  J.  R.] 

§  V.  5&2.  [Ed.  Totter,  p.  689.  Sylb.  p.  248. 
Klotz,  iii.  p.  52.] 

II  iljrcggcw  buKM.     Protrept.  p.  45. 


will,  to  acknowledge  the  one  Eternal  God. 
As  Origen  reckoned  the  idea  of  the  one 
God  according  to  the  language  of  philoso- 
phy, among  the  xoitai  iSicci  (the  ideas 
common  to  the  conscience  (or  mind)  of 
all  human  nature,)  so  he  considers  the 
consciousness  of  God  in  man's  nature  as  a 
mark  of  his  affinity  to  God.*  Theophi- 
lus,  of  Antioch,  recognises  a  revelation  of 
God  in  the  whole  of  creation  ;  but  at  the 
same  time  he  lays  down  the  position,  that 
a  capability  and  aptitude  of  the  moral  and 
religious  nature  of  man  is  requisite  for  the 
perception  of  this  revelation.  Where  this 
nature  is  dulled  and  dimmed,  that  revela- 
tion is  unintelligible  for  man.  To  the 
common  inquiry  of  the  sensuous  heathen, 
"  Where  then  is  your  God  ?  show  him  to 
us;"  his  answer  was,  "<S/toM'  7ne  thy  man, 
and  I  will  show  thee  my  God  ;  show  me 
that  the  eyes  of  thy  soul  see,  that  the  ears 
of  thy  heart  hear;  all  have  eyes  to  see 
the  sun,  but  the  blind  cannot  see  it.  Just 
as  the  tarnished  mirror  will  not  receive 
an  image,  so  the  unclean  soul  cannot  re- 
ceive the  image  of  God.  But  God  has 
created  all  things  in  order  that  he  may  be 
known  by  his  works,  just  as  the  invisible 
soul  is  known  by  its  operation.  All 
life  reveals  him,  his  breath  animates  all 
things  ;  without  him  all  would  again  sink 
back  into  nothingness  ;  man  cannot  speak 
without  revealing  him,  but  in  the  dark- 
ening of  his  own  soul  lies  the  cause  of 
his  being  unable  to  perceive  this  revela- 
tion. He  says,  therefore,  to  man,  '  give 
thyself  to  the  physicisn  who  is  able  to 
heal  the  eyes  of  thy  soul;  Give  thyself 
to  God .'"t 

While  Clement,  the  friend  of  philoso- 
phy, sought  the  revelation  of  that  seed  of 
a  nature  akin  to  the  Divine,  in  the  philo- 
sophical development  of  that  original  be- 
lief-in-God,^[Z</pra////,God-consciousness] 
Tertullian,  on  the  contrary,  the  friend  of 
nature,  the  enemy  of  art,  and  of  the  wis- 
dom of  the  schools,  in  which  he  saw  not 
the  developing  handmaid,  but  the  falsifier 
of  that  original  religious  belief  that  is 
founded  in  our  very  nature,  appealed  to 
the  involuntary  testimony  of  the  soul,  not 
as  it  is  Avhcn  trained  in  schools,  but  in 
its  siinple,  rude,  uncultivated  condition.§ 
He  says,  (Apologet.  c.  xvii,)  ''Although 


*  c.  Cels.  lib.  i.  c.  4. 

f  Theoph.  ad  Autoylc.  lib.  i.  c.  2.  [The  sub' 
stance  of  this  passage  is  found  in  ch.  iii.  11.  (Ed. 
Wolf.)  imt  the  exact  words  are  not  taken  from 
Theophilus.— H.  J.  R.j 

§  De  Teslimomo  Animie. 


TERTULLIANISM. TESTIMONY    OF    THE    SOUL. 


369 


shut  lip  in  the  prison  house  of  the  body, 
although  cramped  by  bad  education,  al- 
thongli  enervated  by  bists  and  desires, 
altlioiigh  serving  false  gods,  yet  the  soul. 


pleased  to  appeal  to  the  clear  testimony 
which  was  near  at  hand  and  accessible  to 
all,  and  whose  genuineness  none  could 
dispute,  to  those   outbursts  of  the  soul, 


when    it  awakes,  as  it  were,  from  a  de-   (eruptiones    animse,)  the  still  and    silent 


bauch  or  a  sleep,  or  some  disease,  and  at- 
tains  to  its    healthy   condition,  the  soul 


pledge  of  an  innate  persuasion  and  belief* 
[literally,  conscience   or  consciousness.] 


calls  on  God  as  God,  and  with  this  name  Marcion,  was  the  only  one,  who  through 
only,  because  it  belongs  to  the  true  God; !  a  truth  (see  above)  which  he  misunder- 
'  Great  God  !  Good  God  !  and  what  God  j  stood  and  conceived  in  a  one-sided  view, 
hath  given,'  this  is  the  outcry  of  all  men.*  \  and  through  a  turn  of  Christian  feelings, 
They  appeal  to  him  also  as  Judge,  when  |  actually  proceeding  from  a  foundation  of 

truth,  but  only  not  sulhciently  clear  to 
himself,  and  carried  to  the  extreme,  suf- 
fered himself  to  be  seduced  into  mistaking 
or  overlooking  that  witness  of  the  God 
of  the  Gospel  in  the  creation  and  in  the 
common  conscience  of  mankind.  (See 
above.)  Therefore,  TertuUian  makes  this 
witness  tell  against  him  more  forcibly,t 
"God  never  will  be  hidden,  God  never 
will  fail  to  the  human  race,  he  will  al- 
ways be  recognised,  he  will  always  be 
understood  to  exist,  [he  will  always  be 
heard,]  yea,  he  will  even  be  seen,  if  he 
wills  it.  God  hath  for  a  witness  of  him- 
self, all  that  we  are,  and  all  in  which  we 
are.  Thus  he  proves  himself  to  be  God, 
and  to  be  the  one  God,  even  by  his  being 
known  to  all,  while  another  must  first  he 
proved  to  exist.t  The  consciousness  of 
God's  existence  is  the  original  endow- 
ment of  the  soul,  a  gift  the  same  and  iden- 
tical in  Egypt,  in  Syria,  and  in  Pontus, 
for  souls  proclaim  the  God  of  the  Jews 
to  be  their  God." 

While,  however,  we  find  this  inward 
and  deep  conviction  of  the  universal  ac- 
knowledgment of  God  by  man's  con- 
science among  all  the  Fathers,  we  must 
not  expect  to  find  a  spiritual    mode  of 


they  say,  '  God  sees,'  '  I  commend  it  to 
God,'  and  '  God  will  repay  it  to  me.'  O  I 
the  vvlness  of  the  sou]  which  is  by  its  na- 
ture Christian !  In  fact  when  it  makes  this 
appeal  it  looks  not  to  the  Capitol,  but  up 
to  Heaven,  for  it  knows  the  seat  of  the 
living  God ;  from  him  and  from  thence  it 
came  itself!"  While  others  sought  for 
testimonies  to  the  truth  which  Chris- 
lianiiy  presupposes  to  exist  in  the  reli- 
gious conscience  of  man,  among  the  trea- 
sures of  ancient  literature,  and  even  in 
forged    writings,!  Tertullian    was    more 


•  [The  reading  of  this  passage  varies  consider- 
ably in  the  difTerent  editions  of  Tertullian.  I  sub- 
join two — that  of  Cambridge,  1686,  which  runs 
thus:  "  Deum  nominat  hoc  solo  quia  proprie 
verns  hie  unus  Deus,  bonus  et  magnus.  Et  quod 
Deus  dederit,  omnium  vox  est" — and  that  of  Ha- 
vercamp.  1718.  "  Deum  nominal,  hoc  solo  no- 
mine, quia  proprius  Dei  veri.  DECS  MAGNUS, 
DEIS  BONUS,  et  quod  DEUS  DEDEKIT, 
omnium  vox  est."  Neander  follows  the  reading 
of  Havercan)j)'s  edition.  I  must  ask  my  readers 
to  compare  the  treatise  Ad  versus  Marcion.  I.  10, 
where  nearly  the  same  phrases  occur,  only  "si 
Deus  dederit"  and  (jiwd  Deo  placet,  are  two  of 
the  colloquial  phrases  quoted  there.  The  "  si 
Deus  dederit"  would  rather  indicate,  If  God  hath 
so  disposed  matters,  &c.,  but  the  appeal  to  Deity 


js  the  same  in  each  phrase. — H.  J.  K.  i  i    ,  .  ;     i       ^  .u  .  r  r^     i    „ 

t  As  especially  in  those  under  the  name  of'  thought  about  the  nature  of  God  corres. 
Hirmcs  (Tri.micgisfus)  of  the  Eiryptian  Thoth,  I  poiidmg  to  it  in  all  ol  them  ;  tor  the  lor- 
of  Hysfthipcs  (the  Persian  Gushtaph)  and  of  the  mcr  proceeded  from  the  most  profound 
Sibyls.  Such  writings  originally  sprung,  partly  j  depths  of  the  inward  life,  on  which  the 
fr.ini  heathen  Platonists,  and  jiarlly  from  Alexan- 1  Jeaven  of  Christianity  which  was  thrown 
drian  Jews,  and  were  only  interpolated  with  new  .^^^^  ^j^^  1^^,^^^  ^j.  n,a„kind,  produced  its 
additions  with  a  view  to  Christianity.     According  i  .    „  ,-     ,        j    -  i-   .  i  u-i 

to  the  principle  promulgated  among  piatonists  I  influence  at  first  and  immediately,  while, 
and  Theosophistsofcvery  class,  that  the  delusion  of;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  only  gradually, 
the  multitude  is  allowable  for  pious  purposes,  poo-   and  in  proceeding  from  this  [i.  e.  this  first 

]<\e  thought  themselves  authorised  to  promote  such  I — 

fictions.  But  we  should  be  doing  an  injustice,  if  covered  marks  of  spuriousness  in  the  Pscudo- 
\ve  attributed  this  principle  to  the  Fathers  gencr-  sibylline  books,  or  rather,  because  on  doctrinal 
ally.     As  most  of  them,  with  the  ex(ei)tion    of   grounds  they  would  not  allow  of  the  existence  of 


the  Alexandrians  and  particularly  of  Ouhjek, 
were  entirely  destitute  of  critical  attainments,  (hey 
might  easily  be  deceived,  especially  where  they 
were  willing  to  be  so.  Besides,  at  the  time  in 
which  the  false  Sibylline  books  first  became  cur 


any  Prophetesses  among  the  heathen.     See  Ori- 
gcn.  c.  Cels.  lib.  v.  5;  61. 

*  De  Test,  Anima;,  c.  5. 

f   1  c.  Marcion,  lib.  i.e.  10.  comp.  18,  19. 

t  [Sic  probaturct  Deus  et  unus,  dum  non  igno- 


rent  among  the  Christians,  there  was  '  a  party  I  ratur ;  alio  adhuc  ])robari  laborante.  This  sen- 
which  did  not  approve  of  appealing  to  them,  and  j  tencc  and  the  next  are  transposed  in  Neander's 
gave  to  those,  who  favoured  them,  the  party  name  of  translation,  at  least  if  he  follows  Rigault's  Edition. 
Sibyllists — perhaps,  because  their  critical  taste  dis-    — H.  J.  R.] 


360 


REALISTIC    AND    IDEALISTIC    VIEWS    OF    GOD's    NATURE. 


and  immediate  action  on  the  interior  life] 
as  a  centre  point  and  origin,  that  the  en- 
lightening inllnence  of  Christianity  conld 
extend  itself  over  the  individual  ramifica- 
tions of  the  spiritual  nature  of  man."* 
The  saying  of  our  Lord,  "  God  is  a 
Spirit,"  appears,  indeed,  to  a  reason, 
formed  under  the  guidance  of  Chris- 
tianity, at  once  to  suggest  the  notion  of  a 
pure  Spirit,  but  a  mode  of  thought,  already 
spiritualized  through  the  practical  influ- 
ence of  Christianity,  or  by  the  praying 
to  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  was  in  fact 
needed,  in  order  to  understand  the  mean- 
ing of  this  saying.  Those  men,  the  form 
and  fashion  of  whose  religious  sentiments 
had  been  derived  either  from  a  sensuous 
Judaism,  or  a  heathenism  occupied  in  the 
contemplation  of  Nature,  could  not  at 
once  justly  interpret  and  develope  the 
idea  contained  in  this  saying,  although 
their  heart  well  understood  what  it  is,  to 
pray  to  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  Ac- 
cording to  their  former  habits  of  mind, 
they  would  understand  by  vnvi^ai.  nothing 
but  a  mere  refined  body  of  an  ethereal 
nature,  as  contrasted  with  a  body  com- 
posed of  gross  earthly  materials,!  and 
they  became,  therefore,  the  rather  con- 
firmed in  their  error  by  that  saying.  The 
more  lively  their  religious  feeling,  espe- 
cially when  joined  to  lively  and  fiery 
powers  of  imagination,  the  more  they 
were  imbued  with  the  conviction  that 
God  is  the  most  real  of  Beings  ;  and  the 
more  deeply  they  were  impressed  by  the 
feeling  of  the  omnipresence  of  God,  the 
more  likely,  on  that  very  account,  was 
it  to  happen,  that  their  conceptions  of 
God  would  lake  a  sensuous  shape,  and 
the  more  difficult  would  it  be  to  them  to 
lift  themselves  up  above  all  objects  of  the 


*  [This  is  the  same  view  which  is  often  en- 
forced  throughout  these  volumes,  viz.  that  Chris- 
tianity first  acted  on  the  inward  life  of  man,  puri- 
fying his  affections  and  dispositions,  &c.,  and 
then  served  to  clear  his  intellectual  conceptions  of 
Divine  things.  The  first  was  an  immediate 
effect  of  Christianity ;  the  second,  an  effect  pro- 
duced by  means  of  the  former.  It  is  in  this  sense, 
as  opposed  to  secondare/,  i.  e.  consequent  on 
other  actions,  or  produced  by  mediate  ai^enc>/,thaLt 
the  word  immediate  (unmittelbar,)  is  used  in  the 
text.  Our  metaphysical  vocabulary,  slender  as  it 
is,  has  been  so  injured  by  the  usage  of  its  words  in 
improper  senses,  that  I  feel  it  necessary  sometimes 
to  draw  attention  to  tlie  language,  which  is  used 
in  a  sense  different  from  that  which  it  bears  in 
common  conversation  and  writings  where  no 
closeness  is  required. — H.  J.  R.] 

-)-  See  Tertullian,  adv.  Praxeam,  c.  vii.  Spiritus 
corpus  sui  generis.  Comp.  Lactant.  Institut.  vii, 
9.     Origen,  in  Joh.  t.  xiii.  c.  21. 


senses,  to  that  which  would  seem  to  them 
a  cold  and  negative  abstraction.  The 
religious  Realism,  as  yet  not  sufficiently 
enlightened,  which  opposed  itself  to  an 
Idealism,  inclined  in  religion  too  much 
to  refine  away  all  things  into  insubstan- 
tiability,  and  reduce  them  to  shadowy 
nonentities,*  would  be  inclined  in  the 
spirit  of  angry  contrast  too  far  to  sen- 
sualize every  thing,  and  the  more  spiritual 
conception  of  tlie  idea  of  God  would 
then  appear  to  such  a  disposition  under 
a  somewhat  suspicious  point  of  view. 
And  these,  indeed,  are  the  very  circum- 
stances, which  we  meet  with  in  Tertnl- 
lian,  who  makes  corporeality  and  exist- 
ence convertible  terms."]" 

Now  two  different  causes  would  ope- 
rate towards  introducing  a  spirituality 
into  the  idea  of  God.  These  were,  on 
the  one  hand,  a  sober  and  chastened 
practical  direction  of  the  religious  spirit, 
proceeding  immediately  out  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  seeking  to  raise  itself  up  to 
God  through  the  heart,  rather  than 
through  speculation  and  the  power  of  the 
imagination  ;  this  was  a  Spirit  which  ac- 
knowledged from  the  depths  of  the  reli- 
gious conscience  the  truth,  that  the  image 
of  Divine  things  is  only  an  image,  and  a 
faint  expression  of  that  which  is  be- 
stowed upon  the  believing  soul  in  its  in- 
ward life, — and,  on  the  other  side,  a  style 
of  thought,  which  worked  up  the  con- 
tents of  the  Christian  doctrines  after  a 
learned  and  scientific  manner;  such  a  turn 
of  thought,  in  fact,  as  we  find  in  Clement 
and  Origen,  and  generally  in  the  Alexan- 
drian school.  The  former  turn  of  mind 
is  found  in  an  Irenaeus  and  a  Novatian. 
Irenasus  says,;};  "  All  which  we  predicate 
of  God,  we  speak  as  if  in  a  kind  of  simili- 
tude [or  comparison ;]  they  are  only 
I  images  which  love  makes  for  itself,  and 
our  sentiments  and  feelings  throw  into 
these  images  something  more  than  ac- 
tually lies  in  them  ;"  and  NovatianJ  says 


•  [Einem  in  der  Religion  allez  zu  sehr  verdiin- 
nende  und  verfliichtigenden  Idealismus.  [Lit. 
To  an  Idealism  in  Religion  too  much  inclined  to 
thin  away  and  volatilize  (or  evaporate)  every 
thing.— H.  J.  R.] 

I  De  Came  Christi,  c.  xi.  Nihil  incorporaie, 
nisi  quod  non  est. 

i  L.  ii.  c.  13.  §  4.  Dicitur  quidem  secundum 
haec  per  dilectionem,  sentitur  supra  ha)c  secundum 
magnitudincm. 

i  See  ch.  _vi.  and  viii. 

[The  latter  half  of  this  sentence  occurs  p.  22. 
Ed.  Welchman,  c.  vi'ii."  (juem  mens  omnis  hu- 
mana  sentit,  etiam  si  non  cxprimit."  The  for- 
mer seems  to  me  most  nearly  expressed  in  ch.  v. 


ANTHROPOMORPHISM   AND    ANTlIROPOPATHlSxM. 


of  the  nature  of  God,   "  VVhat^  that   is,  I 
that  which    he   alone  understands,    that  [ 
wliich  every  human  soul  feels,  though  it 
is  unable  to  express  its  feelings.'''*     The  i 
same  writer  says,  ''  that  although  Christ, 
because  the  spirit  of  man  must  constantly  : 
be  making  progress  in  religious  develop- 
ment, made  loss  use  of  ant/iropomorphic  , 
images  than  the  Old  Testament,  yet  that 
lie  could  speak    of  the   Being,   who  is 
above  all  human  representation  and  Ian- j 
guagc,  only  in   images,  which  fell   short 
of  the  thing  itself.'"  | 

We  must  be  careful  to  make  a  proper 
distinction     between     Jlnthropomorphism 
in  the  representations  of  God,  and   ^^in- 
tliropopathism*     The   latter    consists    in  i 
that  inclination   of  man   to  represent  to 
himself    the  Supreme  Being  after  the  an- 
alogy of  his  own  spirit,  and  by  it  he  is 
easily  misled  into  attributing  to  God  that 
which  is  founded  upon  the  limits  and  im-  ! 
perfections  of  his  own  nature  ;  and  even 
if  that  Anthropomorphism,  of  which  we 
speak,  was  obliged  to  yield  by  degrees  to 
the  spirimalizing  influence  of  Christianity, 
yet  Christianity  could  not  act  upon  An-  ; 
i/iropopat/iism    in  the  same  manner,    be- ' 
cause  there  is  a  foundation  to  it  (iiamely^  \ 
.inthrojJopatkis7n,)  which   is    inseparable  i 
from  the  nature  of  man,  which  can  never 
step   beyond   its  own  peculiar  condition, 
and  can  receive  all  which  it  does  appro- 
priate to  itself,  only  in  the  form  allowed  by  j 
that  condition.    A  great  truth  is  also  at  the 
bottom   of  this    Anthropopathism,  inas- 
much as  the  spirit   of  man  is    destined 
to   represent   the  image  of  the  Supreme 
Spirit.     Now,  as  far  as  Anthropopathism  ; 
is  founded  on  the  essential  attributes  of 
human  nature,  Christianity   must  engraft 
itself  upon  it,  but  must  at  the  same  time  | 
purify  and   ennoble  it  together  with  the 
rest  of  man's  nature,  because  it  revealed 
the  perfect  realization  of  the  image   of 

"  f<st  enim  simplex,  et  sine  uUa  corporea  concre- 
tionc,  qui(}quid  illiid  est  totus,  quod  se  solus  scit 
esse  ;  quundoquidem  Spiri/us  sit  dictus."  On 
the  passage  afterwards  which  makes  even/  Spirit 
a  creature,  see  Welchman's  note.  The  meaning  ' 
seems  to  1)6  clearly  'every  mere  Spirit;'  i.  e.  that 
of  which  nothing  else  could  be  predicated  than  ; 
that  it  is  A  Spirit,  '  is  a  creature.'  The  whole 
passage  to  the  end  of  ch.  viii.  ought  to  he  read, 
to  enter  into  the  writer's  meaning.  The  first  quo- 
tation is  the  same  as  occurs  in  Neander's  next 
note,  only  with  a  different  reading. — H.  .1.  R.] 

*  Quod  mens  omnis  humana  sent  it,  etsi  non 
expriiiiit. 

I  I  use  these  two  expressions  in  their  proper 
senses,  which  are  both  etymologically  and  histo- 
rically widely  diirerent. 

46 


3G1 

God  in  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  and 
renewed  that  image  of  God  in  all  man- 
kind. Even  here  also  all  must  arise  and 
develope  itself  from  the  fundamental  con- 
sciousness of  a  renewed  communion  be- 
tween God  and  man.  In  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  God  as  the  Redeetner  of 
human  nature  an  opposition  was  at  once 
established  to  all  false  Anthroj)opaliiism 
in  a  moral  point  of  view  ;  for  here  tiie 
holiness  of  God  revealed  itself  in  oppo- 
sition to  all  sin,  as  well  as  the  eternal  love 
of  God  towards  a  being  entangled  in  sin, 
whom  a  holy  love  desires  to  free  from 
sin  and  to  lead  back  to  God. 

Tlie  two  opposite  dispositions,  which 
resolve  themselves  into  the  common  con- 
trast of  religious  Realism  and  Idealism, 
were  here  aLso  opposeil  to  each  other  (as 
we  remarked  in  tiie  general  introduction,) 
among  the  Jews  and  the  Heathens; 
namely, — an  impure  scnsuotis  corporeal 
conception*  of  God  among  the  ruder  mul- 
titude, and  a  stripping  off'  all  human  at- 
tributcs^'f  by  which  the  idea  of  God  was 
too  subtilized  and  rendered  untenable  to 
the  human  mind ;  the  latter  was  found 
among  the  Platonists,  who  placed  only 
an  abstract  idea  of  perfection  in  the  stead 
of  that  of  the  living  God.  Between  these 
two  opposite  extremes,  the  development 
of  the  idea  of  God  was  to  be  conducted 
by  Christianity. 

One  extreme  constantly  produced  the 
other.  The  rude  and  carnal  anlhropo- 
pathical  ideas,  which  fleshly  minded  Jews 
and  uninformed  Christians,  by  clinging 
to  the  letter,  made  to  themselves  out  of 
j)assages  from  the  Old  Testiiment,  which 
they  misunderstood,  induced  a  Marcion 
to  form  to  himself  out  of  the  God  of  the 
Old  Testament,  exactly  such  a  being  as 
those  people  had  imagined  their  god  to 
be.  The  carnal  conceptions  of  the  ideas 
of  Divine  wrath  and  a  Divine  justice, 
which  he  found  current,  impelled  him  to 
take  up  an  opposite  principle,  by  which 
he  entirely  mistook  ami  obliterated  the 
fundamental  and  objective  truth,  which 
really  did  belong  to  these  notions,  on  ac- 
count of  the  form  in  which  they  were 
presented  to  him  ;  and  after  another  mode 
of  Anthropopathism,  more  in  accordance 
with  a  tender  heart,  he  formed  to  himself 
the  notion  of  a  blessing  and  a  redeeming 
Love,  entirely  separate  from  the  idea  of 


•    [Literally,  a  humanizing  of  God. — H.  J.  R.] 
I  [Literally,  a   de-humanizing  of  God,   if  I 

may  coin   such  a  word  to  represent  the  German 

Enimenschlichung. — H.  J.  U.] 
211 


362 


CONTRASTS. TERTULLIAN,   MARCION". 


that  Holiness,  wliich  is  a  consuming  fire 
to  the  sinner.*  As  lor  Tertiilliaii,  vvliose 
powerful  Christian  realism  made  him  hold 
fast  the  fnndamental  truth  of  a  Christian 
.A.nthropopathism,  although  in  the  feel- 
ings of  his  heart,  and  in  the  conception 
of  his  spirit,  he  frequently  had  more  than 
he  was  able  neatly  and  clearly  to  express 
in  his  uncultivated  and  carnal  modes  of 
expression,  he  justly  reproaches  Marcion, 
■who  thus  separated  the  attributes  of  God, 
with  inconsistency  in  his  belief  about  re- 
demption :  and  says  to  him,!  "  Does  not 
the  forgiveness  of  sin  presuppose  the 
existence  of  sin  in  the  eyes  of  God,  who 
forgives  sin  .'"  and,  on  the  contrary,  he 
maintains,  that  the  goodness  of  God  can- 
not be  separated  from  his  righteousness; 
that  principle,  which  sets  every  thing  in 
order,  and  attributes  to  every  one  that 
which  is  his.J  "  The  goodness  of  God 
has  created  tlie  world,  and  his  righteous- 
ness has  duly  arranged  it."  In  opposi- 
tion to  Marcion,  he  shows  the  necessity 
of  an  Antliropopathism,  which  even  Mar- 
cion himself,  although  unconsciously  to 
himself,  could  not  avoid;  but  he  shows 
also  how  a  just  Anthropopathism  must 
consist  in  this,  that  we  should  not  let 
down  the  attributes  of  God  to  human  sin- 
fulness and  imperfection  ;  but  by  a  resto- 
ration of  the  image  of  God  in  human 
nature,  ennoble  that  which  is  human  till 
it  becomes  a  mirror  of  the  Divine.  He 
says  to  Marcion,  "Those  are  extremely 
foolish,  who  judge  that  which  is  Divine 
according  to  that  which  is  human.  Why 
shouldst  thou  imagine  God  to  be  partly 

hiunan,  and  not  wholly  Divine  .'' 

[Moreover,  while  you  acknowledge,  that 
man  became  a  living  soul,  being  breathed 
into  by  God,  and  not  God  by  man's  ope- 
ration,] it  is  perverse  enough  on  your 
part,  to  let  down  God  to  the  nature  of 
man,  instead  of  elevating  man  to  the 
image  of  God Why  do  ye  con- 
sider long  suffering,  mercy, and  the  mother 
of  all  goodness  ilself,  to  be  something 
Divine.  And  yet,  at  the  same  lime,  all 
this  is  not  in  us  in  its  perfection,  because 
God  alone  is  perfect."§  Tertullian  re- 
cognises in  every  revelation  of  God  a 
progressive  condescension,  the  highest 
point  and  the  object  of  which  is  the 
incarnation    of   God.||     "Whatever   you 


may  collect  together,  which  speaks  of 
inferiority,  or  weakness,  or  any  tiling  that 
is  unworthy  of  God,  I   will  give  you  a 

j  simple  and  consistent  answer.  God  can- 
not enter  into  any  association  with  man, 

I  without  attributing  to  himself  human  sen- 
sations and  affections ;  and  thus  by  his 
condescension  he  softens  the  overwhelm- 

i  ingness    of    his  majesty,   which    human 

j -weakness  could  not  bear;  and  this  is  a 
condescension,  which,  however  unworthy 
of  the  Deit)%  is  necessary  for  man,  and, 
therefore,  worthy  of  God ;  because  no- 
thing is  so  worthy  of  God,  as  that  which 

serves  to  the  salvation  of  man* 

God  deals  with  man,  as  with  one  like 
himself,  in  order  that  man  may  act  towards 
God  as  with  a  being  like  himself.  God 
appeared  in  humility,  in  order  that  man 
might  be  raised  to  the  highest  pinnacle  of 
greatness.  If  thou  art  ashamed  of  a  God 
like  this,  I  see  not  indeed  how  thou  canst 
believe  in  a  crucified  God."  It  must  be 
acknowledged  that  the  latter  charge  of 
inconsistency  did  not  apply  to  Marcion, 
because  the  same  principle  which  induced 
him  to  oppose  tlie  anthropopathical  con- 
ceptions of  God  belonging  to  the  Old 
Testament,  made  him  also  an  opponent 
of  the  doctrine  of  a  crucified  Deity. 

!  The  Alexandrian  Fathers  distinguish 
themselves  peculiarly,  in  consequence  of 
their  philosophical  culture,  by  endea- 
vouring to  eradicate  entirely  a  carnal  An- 
thropopathism out  of  the  Christian  system 
of  doctrine;  but  it  was  also  very  easy  for 
them  to  carry  their  notions  too  far  in  the 

,  contrary  direction,  and  they  were  liable 

'to  lower  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  attri- 
butes and  involve  it  too  completely  in 
what  is  onlv  subjective.  Let  us  take  as 
an  instance  the  following  beautiful  pas- 

;  sage  of  Origen,  in  which,  notwithstanding 
all  the  beauty  with  which  he  speaks  of 
God's  education  of  man,  he  does  not 
conceive  with  sufficient  depth  the  sense 
of  the  Biblical  expression  of  the  '  wrath 
of  God'  against  sin.  Working  upon  the 
idea  of  Philo,  as  to  the  two  systems  in 
regard  to  Divine  things,  the  Humanizing, 
and    the     De-Humanizing    system,!    lie 

'says,;};  "When  the  Scriptures  represent 
God,  as  God  in  his  Divine  Majesty,§  and 

!  do  not  involve  in  their  consideration  his 

I  dealings  in  relation  to  men,  they  declare 


*  See  the  representation  of  Marcion's  system, 
given  in  a  former  section. 

f  Adv.  Marc.  ii.  26-7.         \  L.  c.  ii.  12. 

§  [TertuU.  Contr.  Marc.  ii.  xiv,  Ed.  Kigali. — 
H.  J.  R.] 

11  L.  c.  ii.  15. 


•   L.  c.  ii.  27.  t  See  Part  I.   [p.  49.] 

i   Horn.  18,  in  .Tercmiam,  §  6.   [p.  169,  and  seq. 

Ed.  Huct— H.J.  R.] 

§    [^63  ojas-/  Tcv  02:v  K-JLr  auTov,  i.  e.  speak  of 

him  absolutely  and  not  in  relation  to  man. — H. 

J.R.1 


ALEXANDRIAN    SPIRITUALIZATION,  ETC. ORIGEN. 


363 


that '  he  is  not  like  a  man,  for  there  is  no 
end  of  his  greatness.'  (Ps.  cxlv,  3.)  And 
again,  '  the  Lord  is  a  great  God,  a  great 

king  above  all  Gods.'  (Ps.  xcv.  3.) 

But  when  his  dealings  with  the  human 
race  are  interwoven  with  the  subject,  then 
God  assumes  tlie  mind,  the  f'asliion,  and 
the  language  of  man;  just  as  when  wo 
talk  to  a  child  of  two  years  old,  we  lisp 
for  the  sake  of  the  child ;  for  if  we  main- 
tain the  dignity  of  mature  age,  in  talking 
to  children,  and  do  not  let  ourselves 
down  to  their  language,  they  are  unable 
to  understand  us.  Think,  then,  that  God 
also  acts  in  the  same  way,  when  lie  lets 
liimself  down  to  the  race  of  men,  and 
especially  to  those  who  are  still  in  their 
[intellectual]  childhood.  See  now,  how 
we  grown  up  men  alter  even  the  name  of 
things,  wjien  we  conununicate  with  chil- 
dren, and  how  we  call  bread  by  some  pe- 
culiar name,  and  also  drinking  we  desig- 
nate by  some  other  term,  because  we 
make  use  of   the  language  of  children, 


about  the  goodness  of  God  and  the 
abundance  of  his  grace,  which  he  pro- 
perly hides  from  those  who  fear  himy 

The  Alexandrians  here  also  took  a 
middle  path  between  the  Gnostics  and 
the  rest  of  the  Fathers.  While  these 
maintained  that  tliere  is  no  absolute  retri- 
butive justice  in  God,'  nay,  set  aside  the 
whole  notion  of  justice  as  contradictory 
to  the  nature  of  a  perfect  God,  and  op- 
posed the  God  of  justice  to  the  God  of 
goodness,  the  Alexandrians,  on  the  con- 
trary, made  the  notion  of  justice  alto- 
gether into  the  notion  of  a  Divine  love, 
which  educates  rational  beings  in  a  fallen 
state,  according  to  their  several  capacities 
and  needs."!  Thus  they  might  say,  that 
the  distinction  made  by  the  Gnostics  be- 
tween a  just  and  a  good  God,  might  be 
applied  in  a  certain  true  sense,  by  attri- 
buting the  epithet  of  "  the  just"  peculiarly 
to  Clirist  (the  Divine  Logos)  as  the  edu- 
cator and  the  purifier  of  fallen  beings,  the 
aim  of  whose   education   was   that  they 


and  not  of  grown  up  persons If  ,  might  be  rendered   capable  of   receiving 


the  goodness  of  their  everlasting  heavenly 
Father,  and  thus  becoming  blessed.J 

The  doctrine  of  a  crcalioii  out  of  no- 
thing is  closely  coimected  with  the  pecu- 
liar character  of  the  Christian  doctrine 
regarding  the  Deity,  hi  opposition  to 
the  notions  of  antiquity  founded  upon  a 
religion,  which  consisted  of  a  deification 
of  nature,  which  either  carried  back  a 
succession  of  causes  and  eflects  to  a 
blind  unconscious  chaos,  or  at  least  made 
ot  God  only  the  fashioner  of  an  inorganic, 
chaotic  matter — in  opposition  to  these 
notions,  Christianity,  which  frees  the  con- 

*  [The  sentence  in  Neander  runs  thus :  '  Wenn 
(liesc  eine  absolute  Gcrechtigkeit  in  Gott  setzten, 
ja  den  gan7.cn  Gercchtigkeitsbegriir  als  einen  des 
Wcsen  dcs  volkonimencii  Gottes  widcrsprechenden 
umstiessen,  uiid  den  gereclitcn  Gott  dcm  guten 
entgcgenselzten,'  &c.  '  While  these  acknowledged 
an  absolute  retributive  justice  in  God,  and  even 
farther  than  this  threw  aside,'  «&c. 

As  the  two  parts  of  the  sentence  are  contra- 
dictor)' of  each  other,  I  conceive  that  there  is  some 
inisUike,  and  I  have  translated  it  as  if  keine  stood 
in  the  i)lace  of  cine. — H.  J.  R.] 

"[■     A     SlKilOJUVH    O-CfTHflOC. 

4  Clemens,  Picdagog.  lib.  i.  p.  118.  xaS"  o  /<» 
wiTMj  vcs:t«/  Lya^ji  w»,  ayTs  ^cy:!-  o  {tt«,  KtKKMnu 
i-yj.bic,  Kib'  0  it  vlo;  Zv  i  Ac^«  a.in:u  tv  tu  TrdLT^i 

says,*  "  Much  may  be  said  to  those,  7cho   i^^i,  Jik-uh  ?r^'.<rxy'.ei-Jtra.i.    And  Origen  t.  i.  in 


any  one  heard  us  talking  thus,  would  he 
say  'Tins  old  man  is  become  foolish.^' 
and  thus  also  God  speaks  [with  us]  as 
with  children.  '  Behold,'  says  our  Saviour, 
'  I  and  the  children  whom  God  hath  given 

to  me.'  (Heb.  ii.  13.) When  you 

hear  of  tlie  wrath  of  God,  do  not  imagine 
that  wrath  is  a  passion  to  which  God  is 
subject.  It  is  a  condescension  of  lan- 
guage in  order  to  convert  and  amend  the 
child,  for  we  ourselves  put  on  a  look  of 
severity  and  anger  towards  children 
from  feeling  the  passion  ourselves,  but 
designedly.  If  we  preserve  our  mildness 
of  aspect,  and  testify  our  love  of  the 
child,  without  changing  our  look,  as  the 
real  interest  of  the  child  would  require  us 
to  do,  we  spoil  it  utterly.  Thus  also 
God  is  represented  to  us  as  angry,  in  order 
to  our  conversion  and  improvement,  while 
in  fact  he  is  not  sul>ject  to  anger;  but 
thou  wilt  undergo  the  wrath  of  God,  by 
drawing  down  upon  thyself  by  thy  wicked- 
ness, sufferings  hard  to  be  borne,  when 
thou  art  punished  by  what  is  called  the 
wrath  of  God."  Origen  spoke  thus  in 
one  of  his  Si:r7no7is ;  and  also  in  another 
passage  in  his  commentary  on  Matthew, 
where  he  developes  the  same  theory,  he 


arc  not  in  a  condition  to  be  injured  by  it, 


Joh.p.  40,  speaking  of  tlie  dillerence  between  the 
©fic  1  vaSic  and  the  JnfAUv^ycf  iiKiiou 

[The  phrase  ^who  fear    ks-6«v  h\-i<T%xi  Kr^iirh^i  tTi  t.-w  ir^trfu  ku  nv  ul.v, 

ligious    Tiu  ^8'/  t/liu  ruy  j^^iV.YTit  ilK*lc7uvyi(,  r:u  it  Targtc  TCUi 

T»  Stx.-ti:<Tuy>i  T<.u  uku  TrauS'liibi.'Tx;  ixvrx  thv  XpiTTcu 


*  p.  378,  Ed.  Huet 
/(//«,'  of  course  alludes  to  those  whose 
character  is  imperfect ;  who  have  not  arrived  at  the 
point  where  they  may  cast  away  fear. — H.  J.  K.]    ^trif^uuv  iJif.ytT'.uyr'j! 


364 


CREATION   FROM   NOTHING — HERMOGENES. 


sciousness  of  God's  existence  from  every  | 
thing  like  a  connection  with  the  deifica- 
tion of  nature,  presented  tlie  doctrine  of 
tlie  Creation  as  the  object  of  a  faith  which 
raised  itself  over  the  whole  circle  of 
causes  and  effects  in  the  world  cognisable  ; 
by  sense  [literally,  the  appear n7icc-icorld^] 
up  to  the  free  author  of  all  existence. 
I'he  characteristic  circumstance  here,  and 
that  which  is  of  practical  importance,  is 
this;  that  the  incomprehensible  was  main- 
tained to  be  incompreheusible,  and  that 
which  alone  can  be  of  any  interest  or  im- 
portance towards  affecting  our  religious 
faith  here,  was  separated  from  all  the  un- 
congenial elements  of  poetry  and  specu- 
lation, by  wliich  it  had  been  contaminated 
in  the  old  Oriental  systems  of  religion. 
Christianity  was  here  destined  to  purify 
the  religious  faith  as  it  had  been  already 
revealed  in  the  Old  Testament,  from  all 
the  strange  additions  it  had  received  by 
intermixture  with  the  Platonic  and  the 
Oriental  systems.  Thus  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  chap,  xi.,  it  is  proclaimed  as 
an  object  of  faith,  that  things  visible  came 
not  from  things  visible,  but  that  the  world 
was  created  by  the  Almighty  power  of  God. 
This  was  negatively  expressed  in  the  doc- 
trine of  a  Creation  out  of  nothing,*  a 
conclusion  which  was  altogether  miscon- 
ceived by  the  Gnostics,"]'"  when  they  op- 
posed to  it  the  old  saying,  (ex  nihilo  nil 
fit,)  "from  nothing,  nothing  can  come," 
because  this  doctrine  has  an  antithetical 
force  only  against  the  supposition  of 
matter,  which  should  limit  creation ;  and 
in  this  doctrine  it  is  not  Notliing  but  the 
Supreme,  absolute  Being  =  GOD  which 
is  declared  to  be  the  formation  of  all 
existence.  It  must,  however,  be  con- 
fessed, that  this  conclusion  was  intended 
to  exclude  also  a  view,  which  declared 
all  existence  as  a  kind  of  development  of 
nature  proceeding  from  God,  subjected 
God  to  a  necessity  arising  from  the  course 
of  nature,  and  went  near  to  destroy  the 
notion  of  the  absolute  dependence  of 
creation  on  the  Creator.  But  we  have 
already  remarked  that  those  Oriental 
Theosophists,  the  Gnostics,  were  unable 
to  content  themselves  with  tliis  nega- 
tive conception  of  the  incomprehensible 
Being.  Tliey  wished  to  explain  it,  and 
to  make  tiiat  intelligible  and  perceptible 
to  our  ideas,  which  the  doctrine  of  the 
creation  out  of  nothing  only  presented  as 
an  object  of  faith. 


Hermogenes,  who  lived  probably  at 
Carthage,  about  the  end  of  the  second 
and  the  beginning  of  the  third  century, 
agreed  with  the  Gnostics  in  their  contro- 
versy against  this  portion  of  the  Church 
doctrine.  He  was  essentially  distin- 
guished from  the  Gnostics  by  the  turn  of 
his  mind,  which  was  more  of  a  Western 
cast,  for  he  was  more  addicted  to  Grecian 
speculation  than  to  Oriental  intuition 
[Anschauuiig,]  and  hence  also  his  system, 
which  did  not,  like  the  Gnostic  systems, 
set  the  powers  of  the  imagination  to  work, 
was  not  able  to  obtain  so  much  accept- 
ance as  theirs,  and  in  fact  we  do  not  hear 
of  any  sect  of  Hermogenians.  Nor  did 
he,  like  the  Gnostics,  sketch  out  for  him- 
self a  peculiar  system  of  esoteric  religious 
doctrines,  but  he  departed  from  the 
Church  doctrine  only  in  one  point,  which 
was,  however,  a  point  necessarily  very  in- 
fluential on  the  whole  system  of  religion. 
He  was  a  painter,  and  probably  a  very  de- 
termined opponent  of  the  Montanism 
which  was  spreading  over  the  north  of 
Africa  ;  the  artist  was  as  little  suited  to  the 
Montanistic  sect,  as  they  were  lo  the  artist. 
Perhaps  also,  Hermogenes,*  while  he  op- 
posed the  harsh  and  gloomy  character  of 
the  Montanists,  went  into  the  other  ex- 
treme of  laxness  in  his  estimation  of 
what  is  Christian  and  what  unchristian  ; 
he  appears  to  have  had  no  scruple  in  re- 
presenting the  objects  of  the  Heathen 
mythology  in  the  way  of  his  art,  because 
he  considered  them  as  mere  objects  of 


mrf:  IK,  Tcu  /A.M  dvroc 
See  above,  Part  ii. 


I  *  Tfie  obf5cure  wonls  of  Tertullian,  from  which 
I  we  are  enabled  to  derive  this  account,  are  as  fol- 
lows. Pinffit  illicite,  nubit  assidue,  legem  Dei  in 
libidinem  defendit,  in  artem  contemnit.  The  fir«c 
sentence  might  be  understood  so  as  to  convey  the 
notion  that  'i'ertullian  looked  on  paintins^  itself 
as  something  heathenish  and  sinful,  but  such  a 
judgment  could  not  be  confidently  afTirmed  even 
of  the  Montanistic  hatred  of  art  in  Tertullian, 
and  no  proof  in  favour  of  such  an  explanation  is 
to  be  found  in  his  writings.  Neither  do  the 
words  "  he  despises  the  law  of  God  in  refercnee 
to  his  art"  favour  this  interpretation,  for  one  can- 
not think  of  any  passage  of  Scripture,  which 
Tertullian  can  have  considered  as  an  entire  pro- 
hibition of  painting;  but  probably  Tertullian 
comprised  the  old  Testament  under  the  expres- 
sion "  Lex  Dei,"  and  alluded  to  the  prohibition  of 
idolatrous  images  :  and  the  sense  would  then  be, 
"  he  despises  tne  authority  of  tlie  Old  Testament 
by  the  manner  in  which  he  plies  his  art,  and  yet 
he  will  make  its  authority  available  to  him  to  de- 
fend a  second  marriage,  against  the  Montanists, 
j  who  maintained  that  the  authority  of  the  Old 
'i'estament  in  this  respect  was  superseded  by 
(vhristianity,  and  by  the  new  revelations  of  the 
Paraclete." 


HERMOGENES    ON    MORAL    EVIL. — PLASTIC    GOD. 


365 


art,  independently  of  any  reference  to  re- 
ligion at  all. 

Hermogenes  controverted  the  emana- 
tion doctrine  of  the  Gnostics,  because  it 
transfers  sensuous  images  to  the  Being  of 
God,  a>ul  because  tlie  idea  of  tlie  holi- 
ness of  God  was  irreconcilable  with  the 
sinfulness  of  a  nature  which  emanated 
from  him.  But  he  also  controverted  the 
doctrine  of  a  creation  out  of  nothing, 
because,  if  the  world  had  had  no  other 
source  than  the  will  of  God,  it  would 
have  corresponded  to  the  nature  of  the 
perfect  and  Holy  God,  and  therefore, 
would  of  necessity  have  beeu  perfect  and 
holy  ;  nothing  imperfect  nor  evil  could 
have  found  place  in  it,  for  in  a  world 
M'hose  only  source  was  God,  whence 
coukl  any  thing  arise  which  was  uncon- 
genial to  the  nature  of  that  God  ?  Her- 
mogenes, no  doubt,  here  partly  followed, 
as  the  Gnostics  did,  a  subjective  rule  of 
too  limited  a  nature  in  his  estimation  of 
the  diirerent  creatures  according  to  the 
different  grades  of  being,  and  partly  he 
omitted  to  take  into  consideration  what  is 
included  in  the  very  idea  of  Creation.  In 
respect  to  moral  evil  he  was  as  little  in- 
clined as  the  Gnostics  to  throw  himself 
back  upon  the  distinction  between  xciUlng 
and  permitting  on  the  part  of  God,  and 
he  also  with  justice  abandoned  the  ground, 
that  evil  is  necessary  as  the  foil  to  good, 
in  order  that  the  latter  may  be  known  by 
the  contrast;  because  this  position  denies 
the  self-existence  and  independence  of 
good,  and  the  very  nature  of  evil  would 
be  destroyed,  if  it  were  considered  as 
something  which  is  necessary  to  the  har- 
mony of  the  whole.  But  Hermogenes 
fell  into  the  very  error  which  he  desired 
to  avoid ;  because  he  still  deduced  the 
existence  of  evil  from  a  necessity  in- 
herent in  nature.  According  to  his 
theory,  all  that  is  imperfect  or  evil  in 
the  world  originates  from  this  cause, 
that  God's  creation  is  limited  in  conse- 
quence of  the  eternal  existence  of  inor- 
ganic matter.  From  all  eternity  two 
principles  have  existed  \  the  one,  the  ac- 
tive, and  the  forming  and  fashioning  (the 
plastic,) — namely,  God  ;  and  the  passive, 
the  undelerminate  in  itself,*  and  the  form- 
less— namely,  matter.  This  latter  is  an 
infinite  chaotic  mass  in  constant  motion, 
in  which  all  opposite  qualities  are  present 
undeveloped  and  run  into  each  other,  full 


*  ['Das  in  sich  selbst  unbestimmte ;'  'without 
power  or  purpose  to  throw  itself  into  any  definite 
state  or  form." — H.  J.  R.J 


of  wild  impulse,  without  law  or  order, 
and  like  the  motion  of  a  cauldron  that 
boils  up  in  every  direction.*  This  infi- 
nite chaos,  thrown  as  it  was  into  endless 
and  irregular  motion,  could  not  at  any 
point  be  laid  hold  of  by  a  single  act, 
brought  to  a  stand-still,  and  compelled  to 
subject  itself  to  be  formed  and  fashioned. 
It  was  only  through  the  relation  of  his 
nature  to  that  of  matter,  that  God  could 
work  upon  tliis  mass  ;  as  the  magnet  by 
some  inherent  necessity  attracts  iron  ;"f  as 
beauty  exerts  a  natural  force  of  attrac- 
tion on  all  that  approaches  it,  so  God 
exerts  a  fashioning  influence  on  matter 
by  his  mere  appearance,  and  by  the  su- 
perior power  of  his  Divine  Being.J  Ac- 
cording to  these  principles,  he  could  not, 
with  any  consistency,  maintain  a  begin- 
ning of  existence  to  the  creation,  and,  in 
fact  he  does  not  appear  to  have  assumed 
any  such  beginning,  as  we  may  judge 
from  the  grounds  which  he  alleges  for 
his  doctrine  on  this  subject;  namely, that 
since  dominion  is  a  necessary  attribute  of 
God,  there  must  always  have  been  matter 
for  him  to  exercise  that  dominion  upon. 
In  accordance  with  this  view  he  main- 
tained an  eternal  influence  of  God  upon 
matter,  which  consisted,  according  to  his 
system,  in  the  victorious  plastic  power. 
From  what  has  been  said,  it  follows,  that 
we  must  not  conceive  that  in  his  system 
chaos  was  a  separate  thing  existing  by 
itself,  and  that  the  influence  of  this 
Divine  plastic  power  had  begun  at  some 
particular  instant,  whereas  [according  to 
his  system,]  it  can  exist  only  in  connec- 
tion with  this  organization,  which  is  im- 
parted to  it  [by  God,]  and  they  can  be 
separated  only  in  idea.  Froni  the  resist- 
ance of  this  infinite  matter,  which  was 
to  be  fashioned  by  degrees  in  all  its  sepa- 
rate parts,  against  the  fashioning  power 
of  God,  which  could  only  penetrate  ir 
successfully  by  degrees,  he  deduced  all 
that  is  imperfect  and  evil.  Thus  the  old 
chaos  manifests  itself  in  all  that  is  hateful 
in  nature,  and  all  that  is  morally  evil  in 
the  spiritual  world."§ 

That  Hermogenes   should  maintain  a 

*  Inconditus,  et  confusus,  et  turbulentua  motus, 
sicut  ollffl  unJique   ehullicntis. 

■|-  We  here  recosjnise  the  painter. 

t  Non  jjcrtransicns  matcriam  facit  Dcus  mun- 
dum,  sed  solummodo  apparcns  et  adpropincjuans 
ei,  sicut  facit  qui  decor,  solummodo  ad|)arcas,  et 
magnes  lapis  solummodo  adpropimiuans. 

(j  \\.  c.  Physical  deformity  and  moral  evil  are 
the  phenomena  which  give  testimony  to  the  ex- 
istence of  this  Chaos,  and  they  are  its  manifesta- 
tions.— H.  J.  R.] 

2  h2 


366 


PLASTIC    GOD. ORIGEV. 


progressive  formation  of  matter,  co-ex- 
isting with  an  eternal  creation,  was  an 
inconsistency,  because  no  progressive 
development  can  be  imagined  witiiout  a 
beginning.  His  inconsistency  would  be 
still  more  striking,  if  the  account  of  Theo- 
doret  is  accurate,  by  which  he  is  made  to 
hold  a  final  aim  of  this  development.  He 
maintained  in  fact  tiien,  (if  this  account  be 
true,)  like  the  Manichees,  that  at  last  all 
evil  woidd  resolve  itself  into  matter,  from 
which  it  originated,  and  then  also  that  a 
separation  would  take  place  between  that 
part  of  matter,  which  is  capable  of  organi- 
zation, and  that  which  oliered  an  obsti- 
nate resistance  to  it.*  Here  the  teleolo- 
gical  and  moral  element,  which  adhered 
to  him  from  his  Christianity,  and  did  not 
suit  this  heallienish  natural  view  of  evil, 
rendered  him  inconsistent.! 

Irenasus  and  Tertullian  maintained,  the 
former  against  the  Gnostics,  the  latter 
against  Hermogenes,  the  simple  Christian 
doctrine  of  the  creation,  without  permit- 
ling  themselves  to  enter  upon  speculations 
concerning  it. 

Origen  was  distinguished  also  in  this 
respect  from  these  Fathers  by  a  system 
peculiar  to  himself,  of  which  we  must 
develope  the  fundamental  features,  as  far 
as  they  are  connected  witli  the  doctrine 
of  the  creation.  In  accordance  with  the 
character  of  his  Gnosis  (see  above,)  he 
fouiuled  his  system  on  the  belief  generally 
prevalent  in  the  whole  Church,  and 
thouglit  that  his  speculative  inquiries, 
which  stepped  beyond  this,  might  be  very 
consistently  imited  with  it.  He  declared 
himself  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  a 
creation  out  of  nothing,  as  far  as  the  free 
action  of  Divine  power,  unlimited  by  any 
condition  inherent  in  pre-existent  matter, 


*  Theodoret  does  not  say  this  expressly,  but 
such  a  doctrine  is  necessarily  implied  in  that, 
which,  according  to  his  account,  Hermogenes 
held.  Theodoret's  words  (Ha^ret.  fab.  i.  19,)  are 
tfiese  :   tcv  efs  Si-xfioKcv  x  u  tw;  Sm/^ovu.;  ik  tdv  iiKm 

j  Theodoret  ascribes  to  Hermogenes  also  the 
doctrine,  that  Christ  deposited  his  body  in  the  sun. 
A  question  would  arise  here,  whether  Theodoret 
has  not  confused  his  doctrine  with  some  others 
like  it;  and  in  what  way  his  words  arc  to  be 
imdcrstood.  Perhaps,  Hermogenes  taught  that 
Christ,  when  he  raised  himself  into  his  heavenly 
existence,  left  behind  him  in  the  sun  the  garb 
which  he  had  taken  from  the  material  world.  And 
yet  it  is  difficult  to  attribute  confidently  so  entirely 
fantastic  an  opinion  to  Hermogenes,  and  tlie  mat- 
ter must  be  left  in  ol)scunty  for  want  of  evidence. 
Perhaps  also,  some  meaning  of  Psal.  xix.  4,  with  a 
messianic  interpretation  according  to  the  version 
of  the  LXX.  may  have  led  the  way  to  this  notion. 


was  indicated  by  this  doctrine;  and  this 
he  did,  not  merely  with  acquiescence,  but 
out  of  hearty  persuasion.*  He  also  ac- 
knowledges a  definite  beginning  to  the 
limited  and  definite  world  now  in  exist- 
ence ;  but  with  regard  to  what  preceded 
it,  he  conceived  that  Scripture  and  the 
faith  of  the  Church  left  him  fully  at  liberty 
to  speculate.  And  here  then  he  found 
those  general  grounds  for  opposing  any- 
beginning  of  creation,  which  are  sure  to 
strike  any  thinking  mind,  which  is  un- 
willing to  be  satisfied  with  a  mere  belief 
in  the  incomprehensible.  How  can  it 
happen  that  if  creating  is  suitable  to  the 
nature  of  God,  any  thing  which  is  suitable 
to  that  nature,  should  ever  have  been 
wanting.'  How  should  the  qualities, 
which  reside  in  the  being  of  God,  omni- 
potence and  goodness,  fail  to  have  been 
always  active.''  The  transition  from  inac- 
tion to  creation  cannot  be  conceived 
without  the  notion  of  change;  to  which 
the  Being  of  God  is  not  liable. 

Origen  was  also  an  opponent  of  the 
en\anation  doctrine,  as  it  was  conceived 
by  the  Gnostics;  because  it  appeared  to 
him  to  transfer  sensuous  representations 
to  the  being  of  God,  and  by  the  supposi- 
tion of  an  imit^'-of-substance  (the  oia.o(jv 
o-joi/,)  between  God  and  the  natures  that 
emanated  from  him,  appeared  to  abolish 
tlie  proper  distinction  between  the  Creator 
and  the  creation.  But  he  assumed  a  sys- 
tem of  emanation  spiritually  conceived 
and  abjuring  all  sensuous  images,  a  spi- 
ritual world  of  a  kindred  nature  with  God, 
and  which  beamed  forth  from  him  from 
all  eternity,  above  which  he  is,  however, 
immeasurably  exalted,  and  in  all  these 
Spirits,  was  there  the  partial  revelation, 
the  partial  reflection  of  the  Glory  of  God.f 
as  the  Son  of  God  is  the  collected  revela- 
tion of  the  Glory  of  God. 

Origen  here  conceived  the  idea  of  an 
absolute  dependence  without  any  begin- 
ning in  time;^:  a  causation,  in  which  the 
existence  of  the  creation,  as  a  thing  which 


*  See  Praefat.  Libb.  t  (<p;^.  p.  4.  ibid.  lib.  ii,  c.  i. 
§  4.    Lib.  iii.  c.  .5. — Comnieutar.  Genes,  init. 

T.  13.  c.  'Zr).  T.  32.  c.  18.  axr  /uiv  civ  tw?  Sc^y,;  tou 
Qecu  i.7rMjyu.vfA:t  ilvxi  t^v  vlcv,  (f(iu.niv  /uiv  tci  yi  iiTra 
Tcu  C?ntuyu.v/ui.ri,;  tac  oKh;  ifi^»c  /.^sgftc*  uTTAuyst-irjuctTU. 

iTTl  ThV  X'ATrm  'Kt.ylV.W  XTtTIV. 

^  ['  Ohne  ein  zeitliches  wcrden,'  literally  'with- 
out a  temporal  becoming  or  coming  into  existence.' 

In  the  next  clause  of  the  sentence  ('  as  a.  thing,' 
&,c,A  the  original  is  '  als  etwas  scinem  Wcsen 
noch  nicht  in'sich  selbst  ruhendes,'  '  as  something 
according  to  the  laws  of  its  nature  not  reposing  on 
itself;'  i.  c.  not  self-dependent,  or  self-existent. — 
H.  J  R.] 


god's    eternal    action. ORIGEN    ON    OMNIPOTENCE. 


307 


could  not  have  a  self-existence,  was 
founded  from  all  eternily4  VVhat  he  says 
of  the  continuous  regeneration  of  the 
pious,  and  of  the  generation  of  the  Son 
of  God,  may  be  applied  in  the  sense  in 
which  he  uses  it  to  this  also;  because 
the  Divine  Logos  stimds  in  the  same  re- 
lation to  the  rest  of  the  spiritual  world  as 
its  source  of  Divine  liglu,  as  God  stands 
in  to  him.  He  says,  Jerem.  Horn.  ix.  §  4. 
[p.  106.  ed.  Iluet.  H.  J.  R.]  •' I  will  not 
say  tliat  the  righteous  is  born  of  God 
once  for  all ;  but  that  he  is  constantly 
born  of  him  in  every  good  action.  And 
if  also  1  lay  down  to  you  in  reference  to 
our  Saviour,  that  the  Father  did  not  beget 
the  Son  and  then  cease,  but  that  he  always 
begets  him,  I  .should  also  maintain  some- 
thing similar  in  respect  to  the  righteous. 
Let  us  then  see  who  is  our  Saviour.^  The 
reilected  image  of  [God's]  glory.  Now 
tlie  image  of  glory  is  not  produced  once 
for  all,  and  then  ceases  to  be  produced  ; 
but  as  long  as  the  light  is  efFicient  in 
creating  the  image  it-self,  so  long  is  the 
image  of  the  glory  of  God  constantly 
created.  If,  therefore,  thou  hast  the  spirit 
of  adoption  (sonship,)  God  constantly 
begets  thee  in  that  same  sonship,  in  every 
act  and  in  every  thought,  and  thus  thou 
art  forever  being  born  as  a  son  of  God  in 
Jesus  Christ."t 

Bishop  .Methodius,  the  adversary  of 
Origen,  whose  theory  of  creation  was 
controverted  by  the  bishop  in  his  work 
concerning  creatures,  was  by  no  means 
his  equal  in  respect  to  a  spirit  of  specula- 
tion.;!; He  had  not  a  sufficient  power  of 
speculative  perception,  justly  to  conceive 
the  ideas  of  Origen,  and  he  represented 
what  he  did  not  understand  as  foolish  and 
impious.  While  he  himself  compares  the 
relations  in  which  God  stands  to  his 
creatures  with  the  relation  between  a  hu- 
man workman  and  the  works  of  his 
hands,  he  makes  against  the  system  of 
Origen  objections,  which  could  not  justly 
lie  against  it.  How  little  able  he  was  to 
understand  that  great  man,  whom  in  his 
blind  zeal  he  calls  a  Centaur,  appears  by 
the  following  argument,  which  he  casts 

•  Methodius  represents  fiiithfully  the  expres- 
sions of  Orif^en,  when  he  ascribes  to  him  the  doc- 
trine of  a  yivnT'-.v  utt  ytvyrsax  ^^X"'  '^''  ^/t"'  ^"'^  °^  ''" 

■f  Thus  torn.  i.  in  Joh.  p,  32,  we  must  not  ima- 
gine that  any  limitation  of  time  is  indicated,  but 

ti.Ttti,  p^«5k;c  )i//fg*  iO-TiY  euiru  an/jit^cr,  it  i  ytyivtineu 

0  W6f. 

i  Extracts  from  the  book  of  Methodius  found 
in  Photius,  Cod.  2.35. 


in  his  teeth  ;  viz.  that  if  the  transition 
from  noncreation  to  creation  implies  a 
change  in  God,  the  transition  from  crea- 
tion to  noncreation  equally  implies  a 
change.  Now  God  must  have  ceased  to 
create  the  world,  wiien  it  was  finished, 
and  llius  a  change  in  God  would  clearly 
be  implied.  He  did  not  observe,  that  with 
Origen  the  conception  of  the  upholding 
of  the  world  was  the  conception  of  a 
continuous  creation,  and  he  did  not  con- 
sider, that  just  exactly  by  such  a  repre- 
sentation of  creation,  as  is  contained  in 
his  own  argument,  a  self-existence  woidd 
be  attributed  to  creatures  which  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  idea  of  them  as  creatures. 
He  made  another  objection,  wbicli  al- 
though more  directed  against  an  inaccu- 
rate expression  of  Origen,  than  against 
what  he  really  meant,  was  more  correct; 
and  it  was  this,  that  the  idea  of  God's 
perfection  actually  implied,  that  it  is  a 
thing,  whose  foundation  is  in  itself;  that 
it  is  dependent  on  nothing  besides,  and 
limited  or  conditioned  by  nothing  what- 
ever.* 

The  doctrineof  Origen  relative  to  crea 
tion  is  intimately  connected  also  with  his 
peculiar  conception  of  the  omnrpnience  of 
God.  It  happened  to  him  in  this  matter, 
as,  indeed,  in  many  other  respects,  that, 
being  entangled  in  the  ideas  of  the  philo- 
sophical school,  from  which  his  learning 
and  his  education  were  derived,  he  set 
out  from  those  ideas,  as  if  they  were 
acknowledged  truths.  Thus  he  set  out 
from  the  principle,  that  an  infinite  line 
cannot  he  conceived  hy  anij  mind,  into 
which  the  Neo-platonic  school  allowed 
itself  to  be  deluded,  by  their  attempt  to 
measure  an  absolute  reason  by  the  limits 
of  finite  human  thonght.")"  From  this 
Origen  drew  the  conclusion ;  that  we 
must  not,  in  order  to  enhance  the  Divine 
omnipotence,  make  it  infinite,  because 
then  it  would  be  unable  to  comprehend 
itself.;};    Thus  also  God  could  create  only 


•  TO  eturo  St  inuru  ivjT'jU  TrKx^iv/uu.  it  k-u  olI/to  »? 
iaujru  juitcv,  TiKU'jt  tivsu  touto  ju<,v:v  J'.^t<rTf.t. 

f  [N.B.  The  word  here  is  J3fU'".v.v/.sry«,  which 
will  express  that  wherein  our  kiiowledi;e  or  our 
capacity  of  entertaining  idoas  resides,  as  well  as 
our  consciousness  of  those  ideas.  Inpirpular  lan- 
guage, under st audi riir  would  come  the  nearest; 
but  it  is  so  desirable  to  keep  the  distinction  be- 
tween rcmon  and  under.standintj,  as  definite  as 
possible,  that  I  would  rather  use  tlinuqht  ox  com- 
prehension instead  of  it. — H.  J.  R.] 

+  T5  (•■jritr.t  aTrtejxmrot,  and  in  Matt.  Ed.  Huet. 
p.  305,  he  says  expressly :  a^v^x  yie^  tu  <^v<j-u  ol^, 
ol.tTt  7rsp/\«<//3<«<rfl»i  T«  vt^an-.ut  Trt^uKuiit  tx  ^vva- 
a-KCfjtttit.  yyaxTtt. 


DOCTRINE    OF    THE    TRINITY. 


a  definite  and  not  an  infinite  number  of 
beings  endued  with  reason,  because  other- 
wise they  couhl  not  be  embraced  by  liis 
providence.  We  recognise  also  in  this 
error  of  Origen  the  leaning  which  he  had 
in  the  matter  of  religion.  This  doctrine 
is  of  great  importance  to  his  whole  sys- 
tem (as  will  be  seen  below)  when  taken 
in  connection  with  his  theory,  that,  since 
the  number  of  reason-gifted  beings  is 
definite,  and  is  always  the  same,  therefore, 
it  is  only  from  the  change  of  will  and  in- 
tention among  them  that  all  other  changes 
can  proceed. 

The  peculiar  nature  of  Christianity  re- 
veals itself  in  the  recognition  and  worship 
of  God,  not  merely  as  the  Creator,  but 
also  as  the  Redeemer  and  Sanctifier  of 
human  nature,  in  the  belief  that  God,  who 
has  created  human  nature  pure,  has  re- 
deemed it  when  it  became  estranged  from 
him  by  sin,  and  continues  to  sanctify  it, 
until  it  shall  have  attained  in  an  eternal 
life  to  an  untroubled  and  beatified  com- 
munion with  him  in  perfect  holiness. 
Without  this  faith  and  knowledge,  there 
is  no  lively  worship  of  God,  no  worship 
of  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  because  a 
lively  worship  of  God  cannot  exist  with- 
out communion  with  him,  and  becanse 
this  communion  cannot  be  shared  by 
man,  as  long  as  he  is  estranged  from 
God  by  sin ;  as  long  as  that,  which  se- 
parates him  from  God,  is  not  removed; 
and  because  the  worship  of  God  in  spirit 
and  in  truth,  can  only  proceed  from  a  soul 
which  has  been  sanctified  so  as  to  become 
a  temple  of  God.  This  doctrine  of  God 
the  Creator^  the  Redeemer  and  the  Sanc- 
tifier of  human  nature,  is  the  essential 
import  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and 
therefore,  since  in  this  latter  doctrine  the 
essence  of  all  Christianity  is  contained,  it 
could  not  but  happen,  that,  as  this  doc- 
trine proceeded  out  of  the  depths  of  Chris- 
tian consciousness,  it  should  be  considered 
as  the  chief  doctrine  of  Christianity,  and 
that  even  in  the  earliest  Church  the  es- 
sential import  of  the  faitli  should  be  an- 
nexed to  the  doctrine  of  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.*  This  doctrine 
again  is  nothing  else  than  the  doctrine  of 
God,  who  has  revealed  and  imparted  him- 


•  This  is  literally  translated  ;  perhaps  the  mean- 
ing would  he  more  nearly  e.xpressed  as  follows, — 
that  the  acknowledgment  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  was  considered  to 
comprise   the  essentials  of  the  Christian  Faith. 

The  original  is  "  dass der  wesentliche 

Glaubcnsinhalt  an  die  Lehre  vom  Vater,  Sohne, 
und  Heiligcn  Geist  angerciht  wurde.'' — H,  J.  R.] 


self  to  sinful  man  in  Christ ;  every  thing 
here  reverts  to  the  doctrine  of  God's 
being  in  Christ,  for  the  working  of  God  in 
human  nature  redeemed  by  him,  presup- 
poses the  inward  relation,  into  which 
God  has  entered  with  human  nature 
through  Christ,  and  all  is  here  only  the 
continuation  and  the  consequence  of  that 
[relation  ;]  and  therefore,  this  doctrine  is 
nothing  else  but  the  perfect  development 
of  the  doctrine  about  Christ,  which  the 
Apostle  Paul,  1  Corinth,  iii.,  calls  the 
foundation  of  all  Christianity,  the  deve- 
lopment of  that  which  Christ  himself  de- 
signates as  the  essential  import  of  his 
doctrine  ;  "  This  is  Eternal  Lile  that  they 
should  know  thee,  that  thou  alone  art  the 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou 
hast  sent."  But  the  speculative  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity  is  carefully  to  be  distin- 
guished from  this  its  essential  Christian 
import,  and  men  might  agree  in  the  latter, 
and  yet  differ  from  each  other  ui  their 
conceptions  of  the  former.  The  former 
only  set  itself  up  as  an  human  attempt  to 
bring  into  just  harmony  with  the  unity 
of  the  Divine  Being,  the  existence  of 
God  in  Christ,  and  through  Christ  in  the 
faithful,  as  it  is  represented  in  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, and  out  of  that  Holy  Scripture 
formed  an  image  of  itself  in  the  inward 
life  and  the  inward  perceptions  of  the 
faithful.  But  it  was  an  evil,  that,  in  this 
attempt,  men  did  not  rightly  divide  the 
speculative  and  dialectic  element  from 
that  essential  and  practical  foundation ; 
the  consequence  of  which  M'as,  that  men 
transplanted  that  doctrine  from  its  proper 
practical  ground,  in  which  it  is  rooted  in 
the  centre  point  of  Christianity,  into  a 
speculative  region  foreign  to  it,  which 
might  give  an  opportunity  of  mingling 
with  it  much  extraneous  matter,  and  again 
might  lead  to  setting  Christianity,  con- 
trary to  its  peculiar  character,  on  a  specu- 
lative instead  of  a  practical  foundation  ; 
and  the  consequence  of  this  again  was,  on 
the  one  hand,  that  men,  overprizing  the 
importance  of  speculative  differences, 
tore  asunder  the  bond  of  Christian  com- 
munion, where  there  was  yet  an  agree- 
ment in  what  is  practical  and  essential ; 
and  on  the  other  hand,  that  men  stinted 
the  free  development  of  the  Christian 
doctrine  by  the  attempt  to  attain  an  uni- 
formity of  speculative  conceptions.* 


*  [We  mMst  also  be  careful  that  in  endeavour- 
ing to  reconcile  contending  views  we  do  not  de- 
part from  the  great  truth  which  is  contained  in  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  Athanasian  Creed,  that 


ITS    SPECULATIVE    AND    PRACTICAL     ASPECT. 


369 


It  is  self-evident  from  what  has  been  busied  themselves  with  specitlations  on 
said,  tliat  tlie  development  of  this  doctrine  the  self-revelation  of  God  in  his  own  ex- 
must  first  proceed  from  speculations  on  press  image — the  Word  that  expressed 
the  manner,  in  which  the  Divine  nature  in  his  hidden  nature,  or  the  revealing  and 


Christ  was  in  relation  with  tlie  Godhead 
of  tlie  Father.  Providence  had  then  so 
exactly  managed  things  in  this  respect,  that 
ia  the  Spiritual  world  in  winch  Chris- 
tianity tirst  made  its  appearance,  many 
notions,  at  least  apparently  of  a  kindred 


creating  Reason — to  give  a  lively,  an 
historical  and  a  practical  meaning  to  this 
idea,  by  applying  it  to  the  appearance  of 
Christ,  instead  of  constantly  restraining  it 
to  the  regions  of  speculation.  By  this 
means,  the  development  of  the  doctrine 


kind,  were  afloat,  in  which  Christianity  of  Christy's  Divinity  was  placed  in  con- 
could  find  a  point  on  which  to  attach  the  nection  with  that  speculative  idea,  which 
doctrine  of  a  God  revealed  in  Christ,  or  ,  was  already  to  be  found  current,  although 
which  it  might  appropriate  to  itself  as  under  a  dilferent  form,  among  the  Jewish 
general,   intelligible    forms,  in   which    it   Theologians,  the  Oriental  Theosophists, 


might  envelope  that  doctrine.     In   a  dis 
course  preserved  to    us  by  the   Apostle 


and  the  Platonic  Philosopher 

But  in  the  conception  of  this  doctrine 


John,  Christ  himself  has   expressed  with    there    existed    already  among  the    Jews 
Divine   confidence  tlie  consciousness   of  two  dijfcrcnl  views.   One  parly  considered 


his  oneness  with  God,  an  incomprehen- 
sible fact  of  his  consciousness  (Matt.  xi. 
27,)  without  founding  his  declaration  on 
any  of  the  then  notions  of  his  age,  but 
rather  in  opposition  to  the  limited  repre- 
sentations, current  among  the  Jews,  of 
the  Messiah  as  a  man,  who  proceeded 
from  the  ordinary  development  of  human 
nature.     But  the  Apostles  Paul  and  John, 


the  Divine  Logos  as  a  Spirit,  which  ex- 
isted in  an  independent  personality,  al- 
though in  the  most  intimate  union  with 
the  Divine  First  Cause,*  while  another 
party  rejected  this  notion  of  an  Hypos- 
tasis, as  inconsistent  with  strict  Mono- 
theism, and  they  conceived  to  themselves, 
under  the  name  of  Logos,  nothing  but  the 
Reason,  which  is  either  hidden  in  God 


united  with  the  doctrine  of  God  revealed  and  only  engaged  in  contemplation,!  or 
in  Christ,  the  idea  tliat  was  already  in  ex-  else  reveals  itself  both  after  the  manner 
istence  in  the  Jewish  theological  schools, '  of  thought,  which  manifests  itself  in  hu- 
of  a  revealer  of  God  elevated  above  the  man  speech,  and  also  by  its  efficient  ope- 
whole  creation,  the  perfect  image  of  the  ration  in  the  work  of  creation,^ — the 
hidden  Divine  Being,  from  whom  [the  Reason,  which  cannot  be  divided  from 
Word]  all  the  communication  of  lile  from  |  God,  and  which  either  concentrates  itself 


God  proceeded,  the  image  of  the  invisible 
God,  tlie  Word,  in  whom  the  hidden  God 
reveals  himself,  the  First-born  before  all 
creation — and  they  confirmed  and  esta- 
blished this  idea  and  applied  it  to  Christ. 
John,  in  particular,  by  the  brief  introduc 


in  him  or  beams  forth  from  out  of  him.§ 


*  [Literally,  Urwesen.     Original  Being. 
It  is  impossible  to  express  the  idea  with  meta- 
physical accuracy;  if  we  speak  o^  first,  we  give 
the  idea  of  being  prior  to  the  Word,  which  is  yet 
^       ,        ,  -y-,  1-1         1,1  held  to  be  eternal.     I  use  the  word  First  cause, 

tion  prefixed  to  his  Gospel,  induced  those  therefore,  relatively  to  other  Beings,  as  it  is  used 
among  his  contemporaries  who  sought  in  common  parlance,  not  as  expressing  priority  of 
after  a  knowledge  of  Divine  things,  who  |  existence  in  the  Father  relative  to  the  Son,  or 


each  person  is  acknowledged  "  by  himself  to  be 

both  God  and  Lord,  and  yet  that  no  one  should 

for  a  moment  believe  that  there  be  '  three  Gods  or    for'  clear  statements 

three  Lords.'  "     We  must  take  care  that  we  do  :  Newm  in's 


Word.— H.J.  R^ 

I  The  Koy.i  hSM^noi;. 

[I  recommend  those  English  readers  who  wish 

this  subject,  to   consult 

Arians  of  the  Fourth  Century,"  es- 

not  explain  the  Divinity  of  the  Son   as  the  mere  '  pecially  ch.  ii.  §  .3  and  4. H.  J.  K.] 

indwelling  of  the  Father  in  Jesus  Christ ;  or  be-        ^  ^,^y^f  Trfcocp/xjc. 

Hevc  that  the  Son  is  the  mere  manifestation  of  the  j  [The  same  Reason,  therefore,  was  conceived 
Father;  or  we  shall  fall  into  Sabelliani.sm  or  Patri-  under  two  different  conditions.  It  received  the 
passianism  at  once.  The  evil  which  Neander  name  of  >.c>oc  tvSiudircc  when  considered  as  re- 
wishes  to  obviate  seems  to  be  the  attempt  to  ex-    siding  in  God,  and  delighting  itself  in  contcmpla- 


pluin  this  great  truth  speculatively,  and  creating    tion,  and  that  of 


'-^5c  7r^',<i(.ejK'ji;  when  considered 


diilcrenccs  m  consequence  of  such  attempts,  as  emanating  forth  from  Hiin  and  revealing  God 
However  wrong  such  attempts  may  be,  in  oppos-  :  by  spoken  words  or  by  the  acts  and  the  works  of 
ing  them  we  must  still  be  careful  to  maintain  that    creation. H.  J.  U.l 


great  Catholic  truth,  the  Trinity  in  L'nity.  and  the 
Unity  in  Trinity,  which  is  founded  on  the  Scrip- 
tures and  must  be  received  by  faith,  though  our 
finite  faculties  are  unable  to  explain  its  mysteries. 
-H.  J.  R.] 

47 


§  See  Clementin.   Homil.    16.  c.    xii.     tk   it 


370 


PATRIPASSIANS. 


While  the  former  was  the  predominant 
mode  of  conception  [as  to  the  Logos]  in 
the  doctrines  as  exhibited  by  the  Church, 
tlie  other  mode  of  conception  made  its 
appearance  not  imfrequently  during  this 
season  in  opposition  to  the  Church  doc- 
trine, and  this  opposition  served  again,  on 
the  other  hand,  to  promote  the  systematic 
formation  and  development  of  the  former 
view. 

Those  who  embraced  the  latter  mode 
of  conception,  in  their  controversy  against 
the  Church  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and 
in  their  religious  leaning,  were  in  agree- 
ment in  one  respect,  namely,  that  it  was 
of  the  utmost  importance  to  them,  firmly 
to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of 
God,*  and  to  avoid  every  thing  which 
bore  even  the  appearance  of  Polytheism.t 
But  in  the  manner  in  which  they  applied 
this  theory  to  Christ,  they  varied  widely 
from  each  other,  according  as  they  hap- 
pened to  be  peculiarly  interested  in 
maintaining  merely  the  principles  of  the 
Monarchla.,  or  were  at  the  same  time  lilled 
with  a  belief  in  the  Divinity  of  Christ, 
and  although  they  controverted  the  doc- 
trine of  an  independent  personality  of  the 
Logos,  yet  had  a  lively  interest  in  main- 
taining the  Divinity  of  Christ  \  in  fact,  ac- 
cording as  they  were  under  the  direction 
of  a  dialectic  and  critical  understanding, 
or  of  an  inward  and  practical  Christian 
disposition.  The  former,  together  with 
the  Church  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  con- 
troverted also  that  of  the  Divinity  of 
Christ,  though  they  were  nevertheless 
content  to  admit  his  godly  nature  [Gott- 
heit,  divinity;  Gottlichkeit,  godly  nature 
or  godliness]  in  a  certain  sense;  that  is 
to  say,  they  taught  that  Jesus  was  a  man, 
like  all  other  men,  but  that  from  the  very 
first  he  had  been  animated  and  influenced, 
more  than  all  other  prophets  and  mes- 
sengers of  God,  by  that  Divine  Power, 
the  Reason  or  Wisdom  of  God,  and  that, 
on  this  account,  he  was  to  be  called  the 
Son  of  God.  They  were  distinguished 
from  those,  who  embraced  entirely  Ebi- 
onite  sentiments,  by  not  admitting  that 
this  connection  of  God  with  Christ  began 
at  any  one  definite  n)oment  of  his  exist- 
ence, but  they  conceived  it  to  be  coeval 

*  The  fji.:vaex"t^  the  doctrine  of  the  mcv«  Apx"^ 
whence  this  party  obtained  the  name  of  Mo- 
narch i  an  s. 

j-  It  was  their  term  of  distinction,  tlic  watch- 
word of  their  party.  Tertullian  c.  Praxeam,  c. 
iii.  Monarcliiam  tenemus.     Origen,  in  Joh.  t.  ii. 


I  with  the  development  of  the  human  na- 

I  ture  of  Christ. 

I  The  others,  on  the  contrary,  in  regard  to 
the  doctrine  about  Christ,  were  still  more 

!  strongly  opposed  to  this  class  of  Monarch- 

[  ianism  than  to  the  opinion  adopted  by  the 
Church ;  not  only  a  leaning  towards  the 

j  doctrine  of  the  Monarchia,  in  which  even 
a  Jew  might  join  with  them,  but  also  a 
leaning  towards  some  of  the  peculiar  fea- 

I  tures  of  Christianity,  made  them  hostile 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.  Not  only 
did  the  manner,  in  which  the  doctrine  of 
the  Unity  of  God  was  conceived  in  the 
Church  doctrine,  fail  to  meet  their  Mono- 
theistic views,  but  also  the  manner,  in 
which  the  Divinity  of  Christ  was  there 
understood,  was  unsuited  to  their  peculiar 
Christian    class    of  feelings    and    wants. 

I  While  the  Logos,  who  became  man  in 
Christ,  was  usually  represented  as  a  Be- 
ing, different  in  person  from  God  the 
Father  and  subordinate  to  him,  although 
in  the  most  intimate  connection  with  him, 
they  thought  this  a  disparaging  representa- 
tion of  Christ,  and  such  a  distinction  be- 
tween Christ  and  the  Supreme  God  was 
offensive  to  their  belief  about  Christ;  to 
them  he  was  the  one.  Supreme  God  him- 
self, who  in  a  way  that  he  had  never  done 
besides,  had  revealed  himself  in  human 
nature,  and  had  appeared  in  a  human 
body.  It  was  only  inasmuch  as  God  was 
to  be  named  after  two  different  considera- 
tions [or  relations,  E^nvotai] — the  hidden 
Being,  as  he  was  before  the  creation,  the 
Father — and  in  so  far  as  he  revealed  him- 
self, the  Son  of  the  Logos — it  was  only 
in  virtue  of  these  considerations  that 
Christ  as  the  most  perfect  revelation  of 
God  the  Father,  was  called  the  Son  of 
God.  They  maintained  that  their  doctrine 
was  most  eminently  calculated  to  dignify 
Christ.*  They  were  called  Pat.ripassia7is, 


*  ri  ou  ncLun  TTQict,  io^^mv  tcv  Xgi^ny ;  said 
Noetus,  an  adherent  of  this  theory,  when  he  was 
accused  before  a  Synod.  Hippolyt.  c.  Noet.  c.  ii. 
And  Origen,  in  Matth.  p.  420.  ed.  Huet,  says,  oy 
I  vcjui^THv  ilmt  i/Tj^  eturcv  (rcu  X^i^rcv)  (that 
j  t/iey  arc  on  his  side')  tcwc  ru  -^sJh  tti^:  ttin-ov 
I  <p^cvcvvTx;,  ^mdiiTii.  rev  S'^^^^uv  cti/Tcv,  cttoici  ilun  ci 
:  a-uy^i-.fri;  Tntrgs;  x.iu  viov  tnoixv  x.tt  th  vTroTTMra  ivx 
'  M'jvri;  iivAl  Tcv  ^TotTSg*  x:u  t:v  uUv,  ryi  (Trtvcitt  /ucyri 
'  X.-M  rctc  ovoiAiTt  ^tilgc-jint:  to  tv  CTrCKil/uevoy  (the  one 
!  Divine  Sul)ject.)  And  Origen,  probably,  had  this 
in  Iiis  mind,  when,  like  the  Gnostics,  he  separated 
J  those  who  knew  no  higher  God  than  the  God  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  Demiurgos,  from  those, 
j  who  elevated  themselves  above  him  (the  Demi- 
urgos) to  the  knowledge  of  the  Supreme  God, 
j  and  like  Philo  also,  separated  those  who  knew 
j  God  only  in  his  mediate  revelation,  the  uku;  tm» 


PATRIPASSIANS. NOETUS.  371 

because  they  were  accused  of  attributing   learn  the  doctrine  of  this  person  with  any 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  to  the  Father.*       \  certainty. 

The  first  name  which  occurs  among  But,  if  we  take  Tertullian  as  our  guide, 
the  Patripassians  is  that  of  Praxeas,  of  we  might  take  two  different  views  of  his 
Asia  Minor,  the  native  region  of  the  doc-  doctrine.  From  some  places  it  would 
trine  of  the  Monarchia.  Having  made  a  appear  that  Praxeas  had  tauglit  the  doc- 
confession  of  faith  under  torture,  during  trine  of  tlie  Patripassians,  in  tlie  manner 
the  persecution  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  he  in  which  we  have  before  represented  it. 
afterwardsf  travelled  to  Rome,  where  :  He  acknowledged  the  doctrine  of  a  Divine 
Eleutheros  was  bishop  (see  above,)  and  Logos  in  a  certain  sense,  he  applied  the 
there  he  brought  forward  his  doctrine  name  of  Son  of  God  not  merely  to  Christ 
without  receiving  any  obstruction,  which  after  his  appearance  in  the  form  of  man, 
perliaps,  arose  from  the  Church  doctrine  |  but  he  recognised  from  the  time  of  the 
not  having  as  yet  been  so  accurately  de- '  creation  of  the  world  a  diflerence  he- 
fined,  that  the  contradiction  to  it  by  the  \  tween  the  hidden  invisible  God,  and  that 
doctrine  of  Praxeas  could  at  once  make  |  [God]  who  revealed  himself  outwardly 
any  impression;  it  may  have  been  the  !  as  well  in  the  Creation,  as  in  the  Theo- 
case,  that  by  his  zeal  for  the  Divinity  of  phanijc  [appearances  of  the  Deity]  of  the 
Christ  against  the  other  party  of  Monarch- I  Old  Testament,  and  lastly  in  a  human 
iani,  the  Theodotians,  which  had  perhaps,  body  in  Christ.  In  the  latter  respect  he 
arisen  at  Rome  by  that  time,  Praxeas,'  was  called  the  Logos  or  the  Son;  by  cx- 
who  must  have  been  favourably  looked  tending  his  a^encv  in  a  certain  manner 
upon  in  virtue  of  having  been  a  Confessor. 


won  still  greater  favour  for  himself,  and 
thence,  therefore,  that  men  were  more 
easily  induced  to  overlook  other  points 
of  difference.  He  appears  afterwards  to 
})ave  betaken  himself  to  Carthage,  where 
he  found  followers,  but  where  the  con- 
trast between  his  doctrine  and  that  which 
was  predominant  attracted  more  observa- 
tion. He  wrote  and  published  an  explana- 
tion which  vvas  looked  upon,  at  least  by 
his  opponents,  as  an  express  recantation ; 
but  we  cannot  very  accurately  determine 
the  state  of  the  case,  because  it  may  have 
happened  that  Praxeas  defeiuied  his  doc- 
trine only  again.«t  consequences  with 
which  it  was  unjustly  charged,  and  mis- 
representations of  it.  Tertullian,  who 
would  not  be  favourably  disposed  to- 
wards Praxeas,  as  an  adversary  of  Mon- 
tanism,  wrote  against  him,  and  his  book 
is   the   only  source  from  which  we  can 


A'-)-:u,  from  those  who  elevate  themselves  above  all 
mediate  revelation  t«  the  intellectual  perception 
of  the  Divine  Bcincr.  who  are  the  uii  rcu  @hv ; 
and  this  is  the  manner  in  which  Origen  arranges 
the  two  classes  of  men. 


beyond  himself  and  thus  begetting  the 
Logos,  he  made  himself  into  a  Son  to 
himself*  On  the  contrary,  in  other  pas- 
sages, it  appears  as  if  he  had  denied  every 
distinction  in  regard  to  the  Divine  Being, 
and  had  applied  the  name  of  Son  of  God 
only  to  the  human  nature  of  Chrisl.t  Wc 
may  suppose,  either  that  Tertullian  has 
not  always  entered  justly  into  the  tenour 
of  the  ideas  of  Praxeas,  or  else,  that 
among  the  adherents  of  this  latter,  difler- 
ent  conceptions  of  his  system  had  arisen, 
because  men  of  uncultivated  understand- 
ing, whom  this  doctrine  suited,  could  not 
enter  into  those  subtle  distinctions. 

Noetus,  also,  who  appeared  at  Smyrna 
during  the  first  half  of  tiie  third  century, 
and  was  excommunicated  for  his  un- 
churchly  theory,  belongs  to  this  class  of 
Patripassians.  Theodoret  gives,  as  well 
as  llippolylus,  the  most  characteristic 
traits  of  his  doctrine,;];  and  he  observes, 
with  justice,  that  Noetus  did  not  bring 
forward  any  new  invented  doctrine  of  his 
own,  but  that  others§  had  made  up  such 
a  system  before  his  time.  According  to 
this  system,  there  is  one  God  the  Father, 


1.  d  juiv  etiv  \x''<j7i  T'.v  Ta>y  Uuv  0s;v,  CvQ^uvci  j  who  is  invisible  when  he  will,  and  appears 
ootasi  T«o  n-arp/.^egJ-.c  ;VT«.- otiTcu,  2.  c(  (VTa//«'./5»-/    (rnveals   himself)    wlicn   he    will;    he   is 

visible  and  invisible,  begotten  and  unbe- 


t;v  ui'.v  Tcy  Oeu,  r-.v  X^/3-tsv  oljT'.u,  ci  i?rt  tcV  trairrgt. 
oSa^atcTt-  Kiv  Ts  7r:tv  iv  uuTcp  't(rrJVTf .  In  Joh.  t.  ii. 
§  .3.  [Ed.  Iluet.  p.  49.  In  the  above  quotation 
/uie^tSs;  ought  clearly  to  be  /uf^iJr.  The  words  arc 
not  exactly  co[)icd  throughout. — H.  J   R.] 

'  Origen  expressly  distinguishes  l>etween  these 
two  classes  of  Monarchiani,  particularly  in  Joh.  t. 
ii.  §  2,  and  t.  ii.  Joh.  §  18,  t.  x.  §  21.  c.  Ccls.  I. 
viii.  c.  12.  On  the  obscure  passage  Cominentar. 
in  Tit.  f.  69.5,  t.  iv.  Ed.  de  la  Rue,  see  below. 

\  With  regard  to  the  chronological  questions 
involved  here  see  above. 


gotten. 


•   Sec  Tertullian,  c.  10.  14.  26. 

f   Sec  c.  27. 

+   HiEret.  fab.  iii.  c.  n. 

§  Among  whom  he  mentions  two  men  who 
are  unknown  to  us,  Ejiigoriius  and  Cleomenes. 

H  Theodoret  refers  this  latter  expression  to  the 
birth  of  ('hrist,  but  one  is  inclined  to  ask,  whether 
he  has  i)roperly  understood  the  meaning  of  Noetus, 


3T2 

It  might  be  asked  whether  Beryllus  of 
Bostra  ought  not  to  be  placed  in  this 
class;  and  this  question  will  be  treated 
of  hereafter. 

Of  the  other  class  of  Monarchiani,  the 
first  traces  are  found  in  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  in  the  Roman  Church, 
whither  however,  as  the  very  name  of 
the  founder  of  the  sect  indicates,  it  must 
have  come  from  some  other  place,  and 
that  too  from  the  Oriental  Church.  A 
worker  in  leather,  who  came  from  Byzan- 
tium, by  name  Theodotus,  is  named  as 
the  founder  of  this  party.  Victor,  the 
bishop  of  Rome,  must  have  excommuni- 
cated him  at  the  end  of  the  second  or  the 
beginning  of  the  third  century;  but  still 
his  party  extended  itself  in  a  state  of 
separation  from  the  predominant  Church 


THEODOTUS    AND    ARTEMON. 


The  Theodotians  and  the  Artemoiiites 
are,  no  doubt,  to  be  considered  as  holding 
that  Christ  is  a  mere  man,  and  as  having 
looked  upon  him  as  being  in  no  peculiar 
connection  with  the  Father ;  but  as  far  as 
Theodotus  is  concerned,  his  own  words, 
which  Epiphanius,  his  adversary,  himself 
quotes,  militate  against  this  supposition. 
It  appears  that  in  the  words  of  the  angel, 
Luke  i.  31,  he  would  not  find  any  proof 
that  the  Spirit  of  God  itself  had  appeared 
in  a  human  nature ;  but  he  saw  clearly 
enough,  that  they  implied  tliat  the  man 
Christ  developed  himself  under  the  pecu- 
liar influence  of  that  Spirit.*  And  as  far 
as  the  Artemonites  are  concerned,  they 
professed  that  theirs  was  no  new  doctrine, 
but  the  old  doctrine  of  the  Church,  and 
that  Bishop  Zephyrinus  was  the  first  who 
_nd  it  endeavoured  to  procure  itself  re-  I  taught  a  different  one  in  the  Church, 
spect  on  the  ground  that  it  was  inclined  |  Now  if  they  would  acknowledge  nothing 

to  maintain  Natalius,  a  Confessor  held  in  ! , 

much  honour,  in  the  rank  of  ^'^^o^■\^YmeAiom^.xe^xe,enii■^.^i^,oriorein^^io^<,\,^^o^. 
This  man  appears,  however,  to  have  been  ^  lejge  them,  yet  both  of  these  cases  must  liave 
thrown  into  a  state  of  conflicting  feelings,  j  something,  at  Ipast,  on  which  they  may  be  sup- 
by  thus  falling  away  from  the  faith,  which  ]  ported.  We  can  then  only  imagine,  that  the 
at  an  earlier  period  had  enabled  him  to  Artemonites  did  not  choose  to  acknowledge  Theo- 
j  „  «•«  • ,™  f  :i„  „„i.«  nnu^  .,r,^„c.;  dotus  as  their  predecessor,  and  that  they  thought 
endure  sultermof  lor  its  sake.    1  ne  uneasi-  >  ,      ,    ,         ^^       .      '     .,,     ,,   ,,;;,      ,^ 

.,.,'=       ,  ,.      ir-r      r-i    they  had  reason  to  mamtain,  either  that  1  heodotus 

ness  of  his  heart  showed  itself  in  fearful  ^^^  ^^^^  excommunicated  for  some  other  reason 
visions  and  dreams,  and  at  last  he  returned  ■  than  his  doctrinal  opinions,  or  that  their  doctrines 
in  sorrow  and  penitence  to  the  Catholic  j  were  different  from  the  Theodotian.  Perhaps  the 
Church.  '  following   account  may  be  given.     The  ancient 

One  Artemon  came  forward  also,  from  {  author  of  the  additions  to  Tertullian  de  Prmscrip- 

,,  ■    .         r         1         c         T,      (■„     tione,  says,  1.  c.  c.  53,  that  1  heodotus  brought  for- 

another  point,  as  founder  of  such  a  party,  |  ^^^^  ^^  ^^^^.^^^^  ^p.^^.^^^^  ^,.^^^  ,^^  had  denied 

which  were  called  Artemonites  alter  his  ,  ^^^-^^^  j^.^^g  the  persecution.  Although  this 
name,  and  continued  for  a  long  time  to  account,  which  is  prejudicial  to  the  character  of 
spread  themselves  abroad.  For  about  >  Theodotus,  coming  from  the  mouth  of  an  enemy, 
the  middle  of  the  third  century.  Nova-  cannot  be  accepted  with  confidence,  yet  it  maybe 
tian,  the  Roman  Presbyter,  considered  it  1  true,  at  least  it  is  quite  possible,  that  a  man,  who 
'  ■       1  ■        11  ^       r     *i      1  had  embraced  Christianity  more  with  the  under- 

necessar)',  in  his  development  of  the  Lt,„^^^g  than  with  the  heart,  should,  for  that  very 
Doctrine  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  to  !  ^^.^^q^^  ^ant  the  courage  and  the  zeal  to  make  a 
take  especial  notice  of  the  attacks  of  that  j  confession  of  it  in  the  face  of  death.  Perhaps  he 
party,  and  in  the  later  controversies, !  was  excommunicated  on  account  of  this  denial  of 
arising  from  Paul  of  Samosata,  this  party  !  H'e  faith,  and  then,  when  he  had  nothing  more  to 
was  spoken  of  as  one  that  still  existed. 


and  whether  Noetuo  was  not  thinking  of  the 
yiniuTt;  rcu  Acycu,  and  under  that  phrase  meant 
nothing  but  the  agency  of  God  extending  out- 
wards beyond  himself. 

*  The  relation  between  the  Artemonites  and 
Theodotus  is  involved  in  great  obscurity.  One 
naturally  asks  how  the  Artemonites  could  appeal 
to  it  as  a  fact,  that  their  doctrine  had  been  the 
predominant  doctrine  at  Rome  down  to  the  time 
of  Bishop  Zephyrinus,  who  was  the  first  to  corrupt 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  if  a  sect  existed  at 
Rome  at  that  time,  whose  founder,  Theodotus, 
had  been  excommunicated  by  Victor,  the  prede- 
cessor of  Zephyrinus,  on  account  of  professing 
that  very  doctrine.  Although  one  may  imagine 
it  likely  enough,  that  where  the  maintenance  of 
men's  dogmas  is  concerned  they  should  be  in- 


fear  from  the  dominant  Church  which  would  not 
acknowledge  him  as  one  of  her  members,  he 
brought  forward  his  doctrines  in  public  for  the  first 
time.  This  piece  of  truth  may  form  the  founda- 
tion of  the  old  account  of  the  matter,  although  it 
is  to  be  looked  upon  as  a  fable  after  the  fashion  of 
Epiphanius,  if  the  latter  has  only  invented  the 
opinions  of  Theodotus  about  Christ  in  order  to 
excuse  his  denial  of  the  faith. 

*  It  is  not  said  ytviiTirxi  iv  <rii,  but  sTJXa/«T«l 
iTTt  a-i.  He  set  out  with  the  notion  of  an  sTs^;^83-9i( 
t:u  Bilou  TrviUfAUro;  (or  tou  Aoyou,  if  Theodotus 
admitted  the  doctrine  of  the  Aoj-oc  in  any  shape 
whatever)  i?ri  tcv  Xpia-Tov.  As  it  is  clear  from  this 
quotation,  that  Tlieodotus  admitted  the  first 
chapter  of  St.  Luke  as  genuine,  the  account 
given  in  the  addttamenta  prescript.,  and  by 
Theodoret,  that  he  acknowledged  the  supernatural 
birth  of  Christ,  is  more  probable  than  that  of  Epi- 
phanius, that  he  denied  it. 


THE    ARTEMONITE    VIEWS. THE   ALOGl    IN    IREtfJEVS.  373 

whatever  that  is  Divine  in  Christ,  and  |  with  which  critical  inquiries  were  often 
utterly  denied  the  doctrine  of  a  Di- ,  conducted  at  this  period  so  as  to  favour 
vine  Logos,  they  had  far  too  clear  a  dogmatical  prcjuilices,  this  accusation  is 
testimony  of  facts  against  them  when  likely  enough  to  be  a  just  one;  and  yet 
they  maintained  the  high  antiquity  of  on  the  other  hand  it  cannot  be  denied, 
their  doctrines.  But  on  the  contrary,  if  that  men  were  then  inclined  at  once  to 
they  belonged  to  the  other  class  of  the  accuse  heretics  of  falsifying  Scripture, 
Monarcliiani,  they  might  very  well  make  when  they  only  quoted  a  various  lection 
use  of  the  indefinite  nature  of  many  old  |  which  was  found  in  their  manuscripts.* 
expressions  so  as  to  favour  their  views,  One  is  inclined  to  inquire  whether  we 
and  they  might,  perhaps,  find  some  in- ,  are  to  assign  to  this  class  certiiin  oppo- 
definiteness  in  a  dogmatical  point  of  view,  nents  of  the  genuineness  of  ilie  writings 
in  the  statements  of  the  Roman  Church,  of  St.  John,  whom  we  shall  designate  by 
which  would  also  serve  their  purpose,  i  the  name  of  ^^/oj^/,  after  the  example  of 
And  besides  the  Samosatensians,  who  Epiphanius,  who  lias  given  them  in  one 
belonged  to  this  class  of  Monarchians,  I  place  this  heretical  appellation,  although 
were  afterwards  classed  together  with  the  the  name  is  not  particularly  applicable."!" 
ArtemoniteSiacircumstance  which  favours  The  first  trace  of  such  opponents  of  the 
the  notion  of  a  similarity  of  doctrine  be-  genuineness  of  St.  John's  Gospel  is  found 
tween  the  two  parties.  in  a  remarkable  passage  of  Irena^us.^    He 

As  to  the  turn  of  mind  from  which  the  \ 

doctrine  of  these  Artemonites  proceeded,  *  An  example  of  an  unjust  polemical  argu- 
one  of  the  accusations  made  against  ihem  ,  ment  may  be  found  in  what  is  said  by  the  writer 
gives  us  some  very  instructive  hints  ;  they  "S;^!"/'*  ^^^  Artemonites  in  Eusebius  v  23. 
P      .   J    .,  ,     -^  I  a  ,u         •'     "Either  they  do  not  behove  that  the  Holy  Scnp- 

busied  hemselves  much  with  mathema-  !  ^^^^  j^  j^^^f^^j  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  thev  are 
tics,  dialectics,  critical  inquiries,  with  the  ,  unbelievers,  or  else  tliey  consider  themselves  wiser 
pliilosophy  of  Aristotle  and  with  Theo-  than  the  Holy  Ghost,"  as  if  those  Artemonites, 
phrastus,*  and  thus  their  disposition  was  [  however  capricious  their  criticism  might  be,  did 
one  in  which  the  reflecting,  the  critical, !  ^°^  think  that  by  it  they  were  enal)led  to  restore 
and  dialectic  elements  predominated,  and  ,  '^'  original,  genuine  text  just  as  it  came  from  the 

,  .    ,  ,,,...,  ^.        ,     .  '     ,        inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 

which  would  diminish  in  their  case  the  ,  ^  .^^..^,,^  ^  „.„,j^  /hich  contains  an  allusion  to 
inwardness  and  depth  of  the  Christian  ,  their  denial  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel 
feeling;  they  Avanted  a  Christianity,  which  I  which  treats  of  the  Logos,  and  thus  contains  a 
the  understanding  could  fully  compre- j  paronomasia  on  the  word  Logos,  i^cya  as  deny- 
hend,  and  that  which  exceeds  the  bounds  i  '"S  ^^^,  Logos,  and  as  being  unreoivnalk. 

r  .1  1.1-  1  X   u  ■  i  The  passage  is  in  Irenajus,  lib.  m.  c.  xi.  fto- 

of  the  understanding,  and  must  be  assi- 1     *,    .,   *      ,*=    „    ,  -n  ^    r  r  ,-^     ,  ,„    „,.; 
1      ir      r  u  i  wards  the    end. — H.  J.  K.J     Inlehccs  vcre,   qui 

milated  into  the  lile  ot  man  through  some  pgeudo-propheta-  quidem  esse  volunt.  propheticam 
other  channel,  found  no  place  in  their  verogratiam  repelluntabecclesia:  similiapatientes 
dialectic  categories,  [t  was  also  made  an  his,  qui  propu-r  eos,  qui  in  hypocrisi  veniunt, 
accusation  against  them,  that  by  means  of    ftiam    a   fratrum   rommunicationc   se   abstinent. 

a  system  of  criticism,  which  professed  to   V"*"""  f "^T   i"''"'^'-  ^''".^  hujusmod.    nequc 
•'  ,       ^  .      .      r  .u      II   1      c     •        Apostolum  Paulum  recipiunt.  In  ea  enim  cpislola, 

restore  the  true  text  of  the  Holy  Scrip-  ^J^^^^  ^,,  C^^i^^j^i^^,,;p^„pj^^ji^i3^harismatibus 
tures,  they  allowed  themselves  to  change  ^iligenter  loqnutus  est,  et  scit  viros  et  mulieres  in 
at  their  own  will  those  passages  of  Scrip-  Ecclesia  prophctantcs.  Per  ha;c  [igitur,  Ed.  Mas- 
ture,  which  were  opposed  to  their  doc-  suet.— H.  J.  R.]  Omnia  peccantes  in  Spiritum 
trine.  If  we  judge  from  their  whole  Dei,  in  irremissibile  incidunt  peccatum."  Accord- 
turn  of  mind,  and  from  the  boldness, ! '"S  ^o  the  common  reading,  the  f.rst  part  of  thi« 
'  '  I  would  mean,    "  The  truly  unhappy  persons,  who 

j  wish  themselves,  indeed,  to  be  false  prophets,  but 
•  Not  with  the  Philosophy  of  Plato,  which  ex-  '  deny  the  grace  of  prophecy  to  the  Church."  And 
citing  more  the  heart  and  the  powers  of  inward  this  would  give  a  sense,  which  in  itself  is  quite 
perception,  led  to  a  conception  of  Christianity,  good,  and  which  suits  the  severity  of  the  rest  of 
more  based  on  inward  perceptions,  and  was  the  passage  tolerably  well.  But  the  reading  which 
exactly  calculated  to  give  a  speculative  form  to  the  has  been  accepted  by  my  friend  Dr.  Olshauscn, 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  We  here  perceive  the  and  is,  if  I  mistake  not,  an  emendation  proposal 
different  influence,  excercised  by  the  different  by  Grabe,  viz. />A«u/o-;7rr>pAf7rt.v,  has  the  advantage 
schools  of  Philosophy,  on  the  conception  of  of  conformity  with  the  part  of  the  context  which 
Christianity  by  their  adherents.  'J'he  Neopla-  follows  it.  The  sense  would  then  be,  "  Thoy  sup- 
tonists,  who  were  converted  to  Christianity, '  pose,  indeed,  that  there  are  false  jirophcts  in  the 
formed  to  themselves  a  speculative  doctrine  of  Church,  but  from  fear  of  false  prophets,  they  go 
the  Trinity;  the  Aristotelian  Dialecticians  denied  to  the  length  of  acknowledging  no  true  prophete 
the  doctrine  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  and  would  either,  and  they  resemble  those  schismatics,  who, 
represent  the  existence  of  God  in  Christ  as  some-  out  of  fear  of  hypocritical  Christians,  withdraw 
thing  entirely  capable  of  l)eing  comprehended.       ,  themselves   also   from  intercourse   with   genuine 

2  I 


sn 


THE    ALOGI    IN    IRENiEUS,    AND    IN    EPIPHANIUS. 


says,  that  they  rejected  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John  on  account  of  the  promise  of  the 
Paraclete,  in  order  to  cut  off  from  the 
Montanists  (see  above)  their  appeal  to 
this  promise  as  a  means  of  rendering  cre- 
dible the  new  revelations  of  the  Paraclete. 
They  maintained  as  a  general  position 
that  there  are  no  gifts  of  prophecy  in  the 
Christian  economy,  and  they  declared  all 
that  pretended  to  them  to  be  false  pro- 
phets. It  was  probably  these  same  per- 
sons, against  whom  Hippolytus  defended 
the  genuineness  of  St.  John's  Gospel  and 
the  Apocalypse.  The  same  persons  occur 
again  in  Epiphanius  :  he  describes  them  as 
warm  opponents  of  Montanism  and  of  the 
prophetical  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  who  thought 
that  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  was  contra- 
dictory to  the  rest  of  the  Gospels  ;  and 
he  represents  them,  where  he  treats  of 
them  specifically,  as  orthodox  in  other 
respects.*  But  he  contradicts  himself 
when  he  calls  the  Theodotians  an  offset 
from  them,  and  then  at  the  same  time 
ailirms  that  tliey  rejected  the  doctrine  of 
the  Logos.  It  may  be  said,  indeed,  and 
not  without  reason,  that  Epiphanius  is 
more  worthy  of  credit,  when  he  absolves 
from  a  charge  of  heresy,  than  when  he 
makes  such  a  charge,  but  other  grounds 
of  judgment  also  must  be  taken  into  the 
account.  And,  in  fact,  Epiphanius,  when 
he  absolved  them  from  the  charge  of 
heresy,  may  have  had  before  his  eyes 
some  writing  of  the  Alogi,  in  which  they 


ones."     It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  this 


had  purposely  avoided  dogmatical  argu- 
ments. 

if,  in  accordance  with  the  expressions 
of  Irenseus,  we  suppose  that  the  Jllogi 
were  seduced  into  the  rejection  of  the 
Gospel  of  St.  John  merely  in  consequence 
of  their  controversy  with  Montanism,  yet 
still  it  is  extremely  improbable,  that  they 
should  have  rejected  a  book  of  so  great 
value  and  importance  to  every  believing 
Christian,  (and  which  in  its  whole  ten- 
dency is  so  antimontanistic,)  only  in 
consequence  of  those  few  passages,  the 
application  of  which  is  so  easily  wrested 
from  the  Montanists  by  a  right  interpre- 
tation, and  indeed,  may  so  easily  be  turned 
against  them.*  The  matter  appears  more 
capable  of  the  following  representation ; 
when  the  Montanists  appealed  to  that 
promise  of  the  Paraclete,  the  Alogi  imme- 
diately answered  that  the  whole  Gospel 
Avas  apocryphal  [Ulerally^  not  genuine,] 
and  from  this  their  opponents  gathered 
that  they  denied  its  genuineness,  only  in 
order  to  avoid  recognising  that  promise. 
The  case,  indeed,  we  must  confess,  is 
possible,  that  the  Alogi  may  have  belonged 
to  the  class  of  those  who,  whenever  they 
believed  that  they  perceived  contradic- 
tions between  the  Gospels,  immediately 
rejected  that  Gospel  which  appeared  to 
them  to  stand  in  contradiction  to  the 
rest.|  But  still  it  is  not  probable,  that  in 
this  age,  in  which  the  dogmatic  influence 
was  so  powerfully  predominant,  any  one 
to  whom  the  doctrine  of  the  Divinity  of 
Christ   was    of    importance,  could    have 


passage  must  have  proceeded  from  a  Montanist,  it  ^  determined  himself,  for  the  sake  of  some 
is  only  requisite  to  acknowledge  as  its  author  some  i  (li^Jiculties,  Avhich    struck  him,  to  give  up 


person,  who  thought  it  of  importance  to  maintain 
that  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost  revealed 
itself  in  the  Christian   economy  hy    '  prophetica 
charismata' — and  it  is  clear  from  many  of  the  ex- 
pressions of  IrenfEus,  that  such  were  his  senti- 
ments.    And  yet,  nevertheless,  the  passage  does 
bear  rather  a  Montanistic  character.     The  latter 
part,  especially,  is  wholly  spoken  in  the  tone  of  a 
Montanist,  who  sees  an  adversary  of  the  Holy 
(ihost  himself,  in  every  one,  who  will  not  acknow- 
ledge the  new  communications  of  the   Paraclete,  j 
One  can  hardly  attribute  to  a  man  of  the  modera- 
tion of  Irenaeus  such  violence  in  tiiis  matter,  and  , 
one  could  almost  be  induced  to  suspect,  that  the  | 
whole  j)assage  has  been  interpolated  by  a  Mon-  I 
tanist.    The  context  would  hold  together  entirely,  : 
if  the  whole    passage   were  wanting,  and   there  | 
would  be  nothing  in  it  except  in  reference  to  the 
Gnostics,  to  whom  alone   the  whole  section  re- 
lates. 

*  Hteres.  44.  ^  4.  S;x.iva-i  t*  aiirx  ny.a  Trivrsuav. 
The  passage,  where  he  says  of  them  tcv  aoj/ov  oi 
Si'^cvTuircv  TT^gx  'la:i)>j:u  KiKHguyutviv,  does  not  make 
it  altogether  certain  that  he^neaut  here  to  charge 
them  with  a  denial  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos, 
because  the  word  ko-^o;  is  ambiguous. 


the  very  chief  book  for  the  maintenance 
of  this  doctrine,  especially  in  this  youth- 
ful season  of  the  Church,  in  which  the 
immediate  feeling  bore  far  greater  sway 
than  reflection,  and  in  which  the  immediate 
impression  upon  every  one,  who  was  not 
just  enslaved  by  a  prejudice  against  the 
Christianity  of  St.  John,  must  have  borne 
its  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  that 
Gospel. 

On  the  contrary,  every  thing  is  ex- 
plained, if  Ave  abide  by  the  account  of 
Epiphanius,  which  indicates  a  connection 
between  the  Alogi  and  the  Theodotians 


*  As  for  instance,  if  they  said,  as  in  fact  the 
Church  teachers  did  say,  in  answer  to  the  Mon- 
tanists, that  this  promise  had  already  been  fulfilleJ 
in  the  case  of  the  apostles. 

t  Origen,  vol.  iv.  p.  160,  t.  10.  Joh.  §  2,  speaks 
of  this  capricious  critical  conduct  in  certain  people 
of  this  age.  The  exaggerated  view  of  inspiration 
promoted  tlus  hypocritical  conduct. 


THE    ALOGI    AND    THEODOTIANS — PAUL    OF    SAMOSATA. 


375 


or  Artemonites,  although  we  would  not ' 
assert  at  once,  that  all  the  adherents  of  ' 
this  party  belonged  to  the  Alogi,  and  re- 
jected the  Gospel  of  St.  John.  Their 
principles  made  the  latter  course  unneces- 
sary, for,  as  they  admitted  a  certain  con- 
nection of  God  with  Christ,  they  might 
also  adinit  the  doctrine  of  a  Divine  Logos, 
who  worked  in  him,*'  and  they  might  also 
explain  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  after  their  ', 
own  notions,  as  it  is  clear  from  Novatian, 
that  they  explained  many  passages  which  : 
did  not  suit  their  doctrine,  as  merely  re- 
ferring to  a  previous  destination  of  Jesus 
as  the  Messiah,  in  the  counsels  of  God.  | 
The  unknown  adversary  of  the  Theodo-  i 
tians  and  Artemonites  in  Eusebius  says, 
that  they  did  not  all  misuse  the  Holy 
Scriptures  in  the  same  way,  and  that, 
while  some  endeavoured  to  bring  it  into 
accordance  with  their  doctrinal  opinions  [ 
through  their  oxvn  sort  of  criticism,  others  j 
rejected  whole  books  of  Scripture.  The 
unnamed  person  here  is  certainly  speak-  I 
ing,  not  of  the  New,  but  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, lie  says,  that  while  they  set  the 
Gospel  of  grace  in  complete  opposition 
to  the  Old  Testament,  they  had  cast  away 
the  Divine  authority  of  the  Law  and  of 
the  prophets,  and  had  torn  asunder  all 
connection  between  Clu'istianity  and  Ju- 
daism.|  But  this  account  gives  us  reason 
to  suspect  that  they  indulged  in  a  critical 
system  which  judged  according  to  their 
dogmatical  preconceived  opinions,  and 
which  might  take  different  directions 
simply  in  consequence  of  their  other  (hf- 
ferences.  Tlius  it  is  by  no  means  im- 
probable that  to  many  among  these  peo- 
])le,  all,  which  was  said  of  a  Divine 
Logos,  appeared  to  be  something  Gnos- 
tical  or  too  mystical,  as  we  learn  from 
Epiphanius,  tliat  they  felt  themselves  pe- 
culiarly at  a  loss  in  regard  to  the  Prologue 
to  St.  John's  Gospel ;  and  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John,  which  from  its  whole  character, 
would  probably  correspond  but  little  to 
their  predominantly  dialetic  and  reflective  , 
cast  of  mind,  and  might  appear  to  them  too  ; 
theosophical,  was  declared  by  them  to  be 
a  forgery  of  the  Gnostic  Cerinthus.  It 
will  be  seen  also,  that  this  cast  of  mind 
must  have  made  them  enemies  of  the 
prophetic  gifts  of  the  Monlanists.     In  the 


*  As  the  flaov  mw/jLH,  of  which  the  angel  spoke 
lo  Mary,  as  at  that  time  the  ideas  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  the  Logos  were  joined  together  by 
many  persons. 


same  way,  what  we  hear  of  the  rejection 
of  the  Old  Testament  by  one  portion  of 
this  party,  agrees  with  their  violent  oppo- 
sition to  ftiontanism,  which  was  often 
inclined  to  mingle  together  too  indiscri- 
minately what  belonged  to  the  Old  and 
what  belonged  to  the  New  Testament, 
and  it  accords  also  with  their  rejection  of 
the  Apocalypse,  although  this  last  cir- 
cumstance may  easily  be  explained  on 
other  grounds.  That  they  attributed  both 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John  and  the  Apocalypse 
to  Cerinthus,  shows,  that,  although  they 
ill  understood  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
because  the  sense  for  its  understanding 
was  wanting  in  them,  yet  they  knew 
Cerinthus  rightly  for  a  Judaising  Gnostic. 
Nor  can  we  leave  it  unobserved,  that  the 
Montanistic  prophetic  spirit  busied  itself 
much  with  the  defence  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  as  received  in  the  Church,  to 
which  it  may  have  been  induced  by  the 
circumstance  of  the  Monarchians  being 
violently  opposed  to  it  [i.  e.  this  prophetic 
spirit.] 

To  this  class  of  Monarchians  belongs 
also  Paul  of  Samosata  in  Syria,  who  be- 
came bishop  of  the  Church  of  Antioch 
at  some  time  between  the  years  260  and 
270,  A.  D.  The  bishops,  who  condemned 
his  doctrines,  make  a  very  unfavourable 
report  of  his  character,*  and  represent 
I  him  as  a  proud,  vain,  and  avaricious  man, 
who  was  inclined  to  concern  himself 
j  with  w^orldly  matters.  Men,  however, 
being  but  little  a])le  to  distinguish  be- 
'  tween  persons  and  opinions,  opponents 
j  in  faith,  and  more  especially  passionate 
I  opponents,  as  these  men  appear  to  have 
been,  deserve  but  little  credit  for  their 
I  accusations ;  but  these  accusations  con- 
1  tain,  nevertheless,  too  many  special  traits 
I  to  have  been  wholly  without  foundation, 
and  alas!  the  picture  drawn  of  him  har- 
monizes well  with  what  we  hear  besides 
I  of   the  bishops   of   Antioch,t    the   great 


•  See  Eusct).  vii.  c.  30. 

I  Sec  what  Origcn  says  in  Matt.  Ed.  Huct.  p. 
420.  "  We,  who  either  do  not  understand  what 
the  doctrine  of  Jesus  here  means,  or  else  despise 
such  expressive  exhortations  of  our  Saviour,  are 
of  such  ft  kind,  that  sometimes  we  even  exceed 
the  state  of  the  wicked  governors  among  the  hea- 
thens, and  want  a  hody  suard  like  the  emperors, 
and  make  ourselves  awful  and  inaccessible,  espe- 
cially to  the  poor.  And  in  many  so-called 
Churches,  and  esi)ecially  those  of  the  <^reiiler 
towns,  you  may  find  rulers  of  the  (Jhurch  of  (Jod  ; 
such  that  they  would  hardly  acknowledge  the  best 
among  the  disciples  of  Jesus  to  be  their  equals." 
fji.niifj.it\    )V;Xcj<av    iTnTgta-ovTJtf    i^S'    ct/    jti«   tc<c 


3T6 


FAVOURED    BY    ZENOBIA. — HIS    DOCTRINES. 


metropolis  of  the  Roman  dominions  in 
eastern  Asia.  The  being  surrounded  by- 
earthly  glory,  pomp,and  pride,  has  always 
been  a  most  dangerous  circumstance  to 
Christianity,  and  especially  dangerous  to 
the  clergy,  if  they  allow  themselves  to  be 
attracted  by  the  glitter  and  the  show  of 
the  world,  which  they,  of  all  men,  ought 
to  despise  in  consequence  of  their  ele- 
vated employment.  At  that  time  Zenobia* 
had  the  sovereignty  of  those  regions  as 
queen  of  Palmyra,  and  appears  always 
to  have  been  friendly  towards  Judaisra.l 
Paul  has  been  blamed,  on  the  ground  that, 
in  order  to  obtain  favour  with  this  queen, 
he  endeavoured  to  present  the  doctrines 
about  Christ  in  a  form  more  agreeable  to 
the  Jewish  style  of  thought;  but  there  is 
no  proof  to  warrant  such  an  accusation, 
as  it  was  unnecessary  to  resort  to  this 
mode  of  explanation,;};  and  as  the  firmness 
of  Paul  in  this  persuasion,  even  after 
political  circumstances  had  changed,  does 
not  appear  to  bespeak  the  truth  of  the 
charge.  But  intercourse  with  the  Jews, 
who  were  around  the  queen,  with  whom 
Paul,  as  a  courtier,  had  much  influence, 
may  very  probably  have  worked  upon  this 
tendency  of  his  doctrinal  views,  although 
even  this  supposition  is  not  necessary 
to  be  made.  It  may  also  be  the  case  that 
his  peculiar  doctrinal  views  contributed 
to  procure  him  favour  with  the  queen. 
He  now  made  use  of  his  connection 
with  this  powerful  patroness,  in  order  to 
obtain  influence  and  authority  in  worldly 
things,  and  to  keep  up  considerable  state. 
In  flat  contradiction  to  laws  already  pub- 
licly promulgated  (see  above)  at  least  in 
the  western  Church,  he  held  a  civil 
employment  under  government,§  which 
could  scarcely  be    compatible   with    the 


■*  Wife  of  the  celebrated  Roman  general, 
Odenatus,  who  had  made  himself  independent  of 
the  Roman  empire. 

•j"  'UvS'ittu.  iiv  Znvc^irt  H.-J.I  n^uMu  Trg'.iTTn  rw  2*//c- 
traw-sa)?.  Alhanag.  hist.  Arianor.  ad  Monachos,  §  71. 

i  [This  expression  is  not  entirely  clear.  I 
have  translated  it  literally,  and  I  suppose  it  means 
that  we  need  not  resort  to  any  supposition  of  a 
wish  to  procure  the  favour  of  Zenobia,  in  order 
to  explain  the  Judaizing  form  under  which  Paul 
presented  Christianity. — H.  J.  R.] 

§  The  ofiice  of  a  ducenarius  procurator  (which 
is  not  to  be  confused  with  that  of  ducenarius 
judex ;)  so  called  because  the  pay  amounted  to 
two  hundred  sestertia  [about  3000/.— H.  J.  R.] 
See  Sueton.  Claud,  c.  24.  Cyprian,  Ep.  68.  But 
it  is  also  possible  that  he  was  in  possession  of  this 
ofiice,  when  he  was  elected  bishop  ;  and  then  of 
course  the  bishops  would  have  themselves  to  ac- 
cuse for  having  sufTered  such  an  infraction  of  the 
laws  of  the  Church 


episcopal  office.  At  Antioch  it  seems 
that  the  profane  custom  of  testifying 
approbation  to  preachers,  by  waving  of 
handkerchiefs,  exclamations,  and  clap[)ing 
of  the  hands,  which  sets  preachers  in  the 
same  class  with  actors  and  declaimers  for 
effect,  had  already  passed  into  the  Church 
from  the  theatre,  and  from  the  exhibition 
schools  of  the  rhetoricians.  The  vain 
Paul  saw  this  with  pleasure;  but  the 
bishops,  who  were  his  accusers,  were 
well  aware  that  this  custom  was  contrary 
to  the  dignity  and  order  which  ought  to 
prevail  in  the  house  of  God.  The  Church 
hymns,  which  had  been  in  use  since  the 
second  century,  he  banished  as  an  inno- 
vation, apparently  proceeding  on  the  prin- 
ciple which  has  been  set  up  by  others  in 
later  times,  that  only  passages  out  of  the 
Holy  Scripture  ought  to  be  sung  in  the 
Church;  and  thus  he  probably  suffered 
nothing  but  Psalms  to  be  used.  There  is 
no  sulficient  ground  for  the  suspicion, 
that  Paul  did  this  in  order  to  pay  court 
to  his  patroness  Zenobia,  as  being  a 
Jewess.  It  is  more  probable  that  Paul, 
who  might  be  well  awt^re  how  deeply  the 
import  of  Church  hymns  impresses  itself 
upon  the  heart,  when  he  banished  those 
old  hymns  (which  spoke  of  Clirist  as  the 
incarnate  Logos,)  might  hope  also  to 
banish  the  doctrines  they  contained  from 
the  hearts  of  men.  When  we  find  it 
stated,  that  the  man  who  thus  carefully 
removed  the  expressions  used  to  desig- 
nate Christ,  was  delighted  to  receive  the 
incense  of  exaggerated  expressions  about 
himself,  in  poems  and  declamations  in 
holy  places,  and  to  be  called  in  bom- 
bastic rhetorical  phrases  an  angel  sent 
I  down  from  heaven,  we  cannot  consent  to 
j  receive  such  an  accusation  from  the 
-  mouth  of  violent  enemies  as  one  on 
which  we  can  entirely  depend,  but  we 
have  no  reason  whatever,  for  declaring  it 
to  be  false. 

As  far  as  the  doctrines  of  this  man  are 
concerned,  he  appears  to  have  had  but 
little  tliat  was  peculiar  to  himself;  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  Judaizing  notions,  he 
compared  the  Divine  Logos  to  the  reason 
of  man,*  eitlier  as  the  hidden  contem- 
plative reason,!  existing  witliin  the  very 
nature  of  God,  or  as  the  reason  that  re- 
veals itself  outwardly  by  word  and  by 
creation.'l  In  the  latter  sense,  the  Logos, 
as  the  reason  of  God,  by  its  agency  in- 


*    iiTTre^  iv  avB^ieTTcv  K,tipJii  o  IJtoi  K'-yo;.  ap  Epi- 
phan.  p.  67. 


THE    LOGOS. 


spired  all  the  men  of  the  Old  Testament, 
Avho  were  enlightened  by  God,  and  thus 
would  also  inspire  Christ;  and  whereas 
he  was  the  most  illuminated  of  all  man- 
kind, tliis  Logos  dwelt  in  him  as  it  dwelt 
in  none  besides;  but  the  difference  of  this 
indwelling  was  only  in  degree  and  not  in 
kind.*  It  was  in  virtue  of  this  pre-emi- 
nent degree  of  illumination  through  tlie 
Divine  wisdom,  that  the  name  of  a  Son 
of  God  belonged  to  Jesus.  When  he 
used  the  phrase  Jesus  Christ,  who  came 
from  below,  'ina-cvi;  Xpurro;  Kccrubi*-,  he 
must  have  used  it  to  imply,  that  the  Logos 
did  not  receive  any  human  body,  but  that 
the  human  nature,  whicli  had  already  an 
independent  existence,  had  been  honoured 
by  a  peculiar  influence  and  operation  of 
the  Divine  wisdom.!  From  the  deficiency 
of  authentic  and  accurate  information,  it 
cannot  be  determined  with  certainty,  but 
the  point  is  quite  unimportant,  whether 
he  referred  the  name  of  Son  of  God  to 
Jesus  only  as  a  man,  when  he  says  of 
him,  that,  in  accordance  with  the  Divine 
predetermination,  or  the  Divine  coun- 
sel, he  existed  before  the  creation ;!{;  or, 
whether,  in  the  sense  which  we  have  re- 
marked above,  he  transferred  tlie  name  of 
Son  of  God  to  the  Divine  Reason  also, 
inasmuch  as  it  (the  Divine  Reason)  had 
equally  called  forth  God  out  of  himself 
into  outward  activity  in  the  creation  of 
the  world  ;§  for  his  adversaries  accused 

He  taugllt  i'j  <ri/yy?yim<r(iut  t£i)  uvfipaT/ca)  tw  a-i(fiuv 
cii:rutJai  ,  ixxu.  x.-xt'J.  Trw^rnTn..  TllC^e  words  of 
I'aul  are  to  lie  found  in  Lcontius  Dyzantin.  c. 
I\'e.st.  el  Euticheii.,  a  work  which  has  hitherto 
been  known  to  us  in  a  Latin  translation ;  but  the 
fraijnient  of  Paul  has  been  published  in  Greek 
from  the  MSS.  of  the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford, 
by  Erlicli,  in  a  Disscrtatio  de  crroribus  Pauli  Sa- 
niosatensis.     Lipsia,  1745,  p,  23. 

•j-  See  the  Synodal  Ejiistle  in  Euseb.  vii.  30. 

%  In  the  Synodal  Epistle  to  Paul  of  Samosata, 
published  by  Turrian  in  Mansi's  collection  of 
Councils,  i.  103-1,  which  is  the  only  authentic 
document  among  those  made  known  by  him 
which  refer  to  these  transactions,  the  following 
antithesis  occurs,  viz.  that  the  Son  of  God  ex- 
isted T£0  a-locva^v  vj  TTgj.ytuKiil  uK>C  ciivta.  ku  iiTr.a- 
Txou;  Irom  which  we  might  judge  that  Paul 
maintained  the  contrary,  Tti»  Ci:v  t-.u  Qtiu  ci-;^' 
C'r.a'ra^ii  axxu.  Trf'-yvw^it. 

§  He  might  engraft  his  own  opinions  on  the 
older  expression  in  the  Apologetic  writers,  iywM(rt 
T'.v  xoy.v  ,T^-.<fog;x:v,  by  understanding  this  so  as 
not  to  include  the  notion  of  an  emanation  which 
had  the  attribute  of  personality.  The  antithesis 
in  the  Synodal  Epistle  quoted  above,  seems  to 
support  this  explanation:  hx  r-.u  k,-^cu  o  ttxth^ 
Tj-vrn  TTiTUiiKiv  '.i^,  ^  i'  '(jyJ-nu,  ciJ'  J,:  Si'  vria-- 
Txuns  avuTn.ffTS.'T'.u,  ytmia-xyTtit  /jui  Tiu  Trure^t  Tc» 

48 


37/ 


him  of  having  maintained  the  existence 
of  two  Sons  of  God,  one  properly  so 
called,  the  other  improperly,  although 
[  this  may  be  regarded  only  as  a  conse- 
I  quence  from  his  propositions  drawn  hif 
I  his  adversaries  from  their  oini  point  of 
\vieu\  and  then  charged  on  him.  It  is 
very  probable  that  when  he  wished  to 
hold  more  closely  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
\  Church,  he  spoke,  in  his  oicn  sense,  of  a 
Son  of  God,  whom  God  had  begotten 
before  the  creation  of  the  world;  but  on 
the  contrary,  when  he  expressed  himself 
freely  without  any  sucii  intention,  he 
spoke  only  of  the  man  Jesus  as  the  Son 
i  of  God,  for  he  expressly  says  that  he 
j  knen}  nothing  of  two  Sons  of  God* 

Many  Synods  were  held  on  account  of 
!  the  controversies  with  the  Bishoj)  Paulus 
at  Antioch  ;  but  he  probably  availed  him- 
self of  the  indeliniteness  of  the  eccle- 
'  siastical  terminology,  and  the  dillerent 
i  polemical  views  under  which  different 
j  expressions  might  be  used,  in  order  to 
I  hide  his  own  opinions  under  ambiguou.s 
:  explanations,  so  that  no  charge  of  erro- 
neous doctrine  could  positively  be  fixed 
I  upon  him.  In  the  last  Synod,  A.  D.  265, 
I  an  able  dialectician,  the  Presbyter  iMal- 
1  chion,t  succeeded  at  last  in  forcing  him 
to  an  open  declaration  of  his  opinion. 
He  was  deposed  and  his  oflice  bestowed 
I  upon  another;  but  as  he  was  supported 
!  by  a  party,  and  favoured  by  Zenoliia,  the 
\  matter  could  not  be  accomplished  before 
i  she  was  conquered  by  the  Emperor  Au- 
I  rclius,  A.  D.  272.  This  prince  left  the 
I  decision  to  the  Bishop  of  Rotne.  (See 
jp.304.) 

I  Besides  these  two  classes  of  Monarch- 
I  ians,  we  find  also  a  third,  which  stands 
i  in  certain  respects  between  the  other  two; 
I  these  were  such  persons  as  approached 
the  second  class  the  most  in  their  theory 
of  the  Logos,  as  a  power  that  beamed 
!  forth  out  of  the  Divine  nature,  but  re- 
ceded from  them  again,  and  more  nearly 
I  resembled  the  Patripassians  as  to  their 
representations  of  the  himianily  of  Christ. 
iThey  were  not  satisfied  with  the  idea  of 

uht  1-  ^ai3-oiY  'ivi^yvu.v  tut  ivuT'.a-Tariv.  From  this 
it  may  be  concluded  that  Paul  spoke  of  a  ri^w, 

j  iTna-Th/ux  uK/TsiTTiTcc,  and  understood  by  the  yuvn^K 

!  t:i/  Koyw  nothing  but  an  tviQuat.  i.»uri3-Tu.Ti:  of 

I  God  the  Creator. 

1       *  fxM  iu'j  erurTx^Qii  ui:t/f.     T^eont.  Byzant. 

I      -j-  From  the  expressions  of  Eusebius,  although 

j  Theodoret,  to  whom  they  appeared  very  oHensive, 
interprets  them  dillerently,  we  must  conclude, 
that  this  clergyman  alfo  practi.-^cjl  the  profession 

I  of  a  rhetorician,  which    was   hardly   compatible 

I  with  his  spiritual  calling. 

2i2 


3T8 


EUSEBIUS    ON    BERYLLUS. 


an  influence  of  the  Divine  Logos  on  Jesus 
as  man,  which  diflered  only  in  degree 
from  the  influence  exerted  on  other  en- 
lightened and  holy  men ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand  also,  they  did  not  accept  the  Patri- 
passian  view  of  an  indwelling  of  the  whole 
Divine  Being  in  a  human  body.  They 
agreed  with  the  Patripassian  theory,  so 
far  as  not  to  separate  that  which  was  Di- 
vine in  Christ,  from  the  soul  that  resides 
within  him.  But  they  modifled  this  view 
so  far  that  they  supposed  the  Divine  in 
Christ,  the  soul  of  his  human  nature,  not 
to  be  the  Divine  Being  himself,  but  a  cer- 
tain emanation  [streaming  out]  from  him, 
which  formed  itself  to  an  individual  spi- 
ritual life. 

Among  the  Patripassians,  who  will  not 
admit  of  any  distinction  in  the  Divine 
Being  (see  above,  on  Theodotus  and  Ar- 
temon,)  Beryllus,  the  bishop  of  Bostra, 
in  Arabia,  comes  the  nearest  to  this  opi- 
nion. According  to  the  theory  of  Beryl- 
lus, the  personality  of  the  Son  of  God 
first  arose  through  a  beaming  forth,  or  an 
emanation  out  of  the  Being  of  God  into 
a  human  body.* 


*  From  the  deficiency  of  clear  and  accurate 
p.ccounts,  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of  this 
man  is  one  of  the  most  difficult  subjects  of  histo- 
rical investigation,  and  therefore,  we  cannot  expect 
to  arrive  at  a  perfectly  certain  result.  The  chief 
passage  to  the  point  is  in  Euseb.  vi.  33,  toi-  awrngA 

jU>l  Trej.U^fiO'TJ.VAl  H.U.'T     liuv   (.'vJliLi    Triply g^V^cfUV   TT^'j    T«; 

ik  ivb^a>?raj;  i?nj>ijuia.i;,  and  in  Origcn  ISiu.  7neryi^t(^» 
or  r/jG-td  x.j.'Tci.  TTi^i-) ^x<p}iv  nicans  an  individual,  pro- 
per, personal  existence,  the  same  as  CTro^ra.nu  to 
which  is  contrasted  ((VUTrctrTttr'.;,  siva/  »*t'  imvoMv 
iTi^'.v  rivoc  See  Origen.  t.  i.  Joh.  p.  42.  In  this 
description  of  his  doctrine  two  points  arc  to  be 
remarked:  (1.)  Before  the  earthly  appearance  of 
Christ  there  was  no  Son  of  God,  as  a  Being  per- 
sonally different  from  God  the  Father,  which  is  to 
be  understood,  either  as  asserting  that  a  Son  of 
God  existed  only  in  an  ideal  Being,  in  the  idea  or 
the  foreordaining  counsel  [of  the  Father]  (jc^Tct 
Tgcyvcixxiv,  or  x^t*  Tr^ct-^i^jucv  rev  TIut^oc)  or  else, 
that  the  Logos  existed  at  first  only  as  a  dependent 
(unselbstandige,  lit.  not-independent)  Power  of 
God ;  (2.)  That  contemporaneously  with  the  in- 
carnation of  Christ,  an  existence  of  the  Son  of 
God  also  began,  which  was  independently  personal, 
and  distinct  from  the  Being  of  God  (an  J<f.35-Tava/ 
KXT  iJtxv  cu(Ti^(  '^i^ty^a.<p>iv.)  •  A  Patripassian  could 
not  assert  the  latter,  for  he  could  only  speak  of  an 
existence  of  the  Father  himself  in  the  human 
nature,  which  existence  was  called  the  Son,  from 
revealing  itself 

And  now  we  must  add  the  second  part  of  the 
representation  of  Easeh'ms,  /unit  /unv  6mt;/t*  iSttv 
t^ilv  uAx'  ifA-rokiTW./uivnv  civTm  juivnv  Tuv  Tra^^inyiv.  If 
what  we  have  above  remarked  is  incompatible 
with  the  opinions  of  a  Patripassian;  so,  on  the 
contrary,  this  last  says  too  much  to  suit  the  doc- 
trine of  a  Monarchian  of  the  second  class.  At  the 


I  In  the  year  244  a  Synod  Avas  held 
[respecting  the  affairs  of  Beryllus,  which 
;  was  attended  by  the  great  Origen,  who 
lived  at  that  time  at  Caesarea  Stratonis. 
He  discussed  matters  with  him  very  much^ 
and  apparently  by  his  superiority  of  mind, 
his  ability  and  moderation,  he  succeeded 
in  persuading  him,  that  he  had  erred.  It 
;  is  true,  that  in  this  case,  we  follow  the 
;  account  given  by  Eusebius,au  enthusiastic 
friend  of  Origen,  and  we  have  not  the 
means  of  consulting  the  document  used 
by  him,  in  order  to  form  an  unprejudiced 
]  and  independent  judgment.  And  yet,  we 
I  must  take  into  the  account  that  as  yet 


j  same  time  an  opponent  of  this  doctrine  would 
I  certainly  have  been  more  ready  to  charge  it  with 
;  representing  Christ  as  a  mere  man,  than  to  make 
!  it  say  more  than  it  really  did  say,  of  the  Being  of 
I  God  in  Christ.  There  remains,  in  order  to  recon- 
'  cile  these  contradictory  statements,  only  the  repre- 
'  sentation  given  of  the  doctrine  of  Beryllus.  We 
must,  therefore,  here  bring  forward  the  fragment 
1  occurring  in  the  Commentary  of  Origen,  on  the 
I  Epistle  to  'I'itus.     Origen,  t.  iv.  p.  695. 

'  Sed  et  eos  qui  hominem  dicunt  Dominum 
Jesum  prtEcognitum,  et  praedestinatum,  qui  ante 
adventum  carnalem  substantialiter  et  proprie  non 
extiterit,  sed  quod  homo  natus  Patris  solam  in  se 
I  habuerit  Deitatem,  ne  illos  quidem  sine  periculo 
1  esse  ecclesiiE  numero  sociari.'  As  in  this  passage 
j  Origen  joins  together  two  classes  of  Monarchians, 
and  in  the  other  member  of  the  sentence,  which 
has  not  been  quoted  here,  the  Patripassians ;  it 
may  be  supposed,  if  we  should  compare  this  pas- 
sage with  that  above  quoted  (some  pages  back, 
on  the  subject  of  the  Piitripassians)  from  the 
I  Tom.  on  St.  John,  that  Origen  in  the  first  member 
I  of  the  sentence  was  describing  the  two  classes  of 
I  Monarchians,  while  in  that  passage  from  his 
1  writings  on  St.  John,  he  was  opposing  these  two 
classes  to  each  other.  I  was  myself  deceived  for- 
merly by  this  comparison  of  passages;  but  it  will 
I  not  bear  being  carried  out  fully.  Origen  ascribes 
to  those,  of  whom  he  is  here  speaking,  too  high 
^  an  idea  of  the  Divine  in  Christ,  for  us  to  suppose 
j  that  he  has  in  view  the  doctrines  we  have  re- 
marked ;  and  he  also  expresses  himself  too  mildly 
about  their  relation  to  the  Church,  to  suit  that 
supposition.  So  that  these  words  most  strikingly 
agree  with  those  of  Eusebius,  and  both  passages 
are  most  naturally  to  be  explained  in  the  same 
way.  We  must  suppose  that  Origen  here  speaks 
j  of  a  doctrine,  with  which  he  was  unacquainted 
before,  and  with  which  he  had  first  become  ac- 
quainted by  means  of  his  transactions  with  Bcryl- 
j  lus  of  Bostra.  And  then  by  comparing  Origen 
with  Eusebius  we  find,  that  Beryllus,  under  the 
words  7r^ov<^i<rTxvAi  avuTotn-ctTaic,  understood  a 
7r^ou<f array *i  KH-rat  Tr^oyvoKriv  Kit  !rgscg(3-^ov  rcj 
riiTgo-.  And  thus  also  it  is  explained,  why  the 
Synod,  as  Socrates,  b.  ii.  c.  6,  informs  us,  should 
maintain  against  Beryllus  the  doctrine  of  a  rea- 
sonable human  soul  in  Christ;  because  Beryllus 
supplied  the  place  of  such  a  soul,  by  the  special 
oiKovofjLi^  rev  fiacu  Tvw^aTt/f.  out  of  which  the  j)ro- 
per,  and  God-allied  personality  of  Christ  was 
formed. 


ORIGE.N    OS    BERYLLUS. SABKLLIUS. 


379 


there  was  no  slate  Tteligion^  and  no  state 
Churchy  which  could  cvmpcl  Beryllus  to 
a  recantation,  although  tiie  authority  of 
the  Episcopal  college  had  already  much, 
and  indeed,  too  much  power  over  the 
Church.  But  if  the  bishops  liad  wished 
to  overpower  tlieir  colleague  by  mere 
numbers,  they  would  have  had  no  occa- 
sion to  call  in  the  services  of  a  Presbyter 
who  had  been  driven  away  and  branded 
as  an  heretic,  and  who  had  no  other 
power  than  that  which  belongs  to  know- 
ledge. And  besides,  Origen  was  not  the 
man  to  use  the  weight  of  his  name  or  of 
his  superiority  of  mind  for  the  purpose 
crushing  an  individual. 

It  is  only  among  the  men  of  the  Alex- 
andrian school  tliat  we  liiul  instances  of 
theological  conferences,  which,  instead 
of  introducing  still  greater  divisions,  pro- 
duced unity  of  mind.  To  what  else  can 
we  attribute  this,  unless  it  be,  that  these 
men  were  not  blind  zealots  for  the  letter, 
but  men  of  a  liberal  spirit,  and  united  the 
spirit  of  love  and  moderation  \\\\.\\  that 
zeal  for  the  truth,  which  would  not  wish  to 
triumph,  except  through  the  force  of  truth  ! 

Although  in  other  respects  the  system 
which  Origen  opposed  to  that  of  Beryllus 
was  not  free  from  error,  and  although, 
perhaps,  it  was  not  merely  the  superiority 
of  the  system,  but  the  mental  superiority 
of  Origen  himself  that  contributed  to 
eflect  this  triumph ;  yet  still  the  system 
of  Origen  was  in  many  points  of  view 
when  compared  with  the  doctrine  of  his 
opponent,  nearer  to  a  pure  development 
of  the  truth. 

According  to  the  account  of  Jerome,* 
Beryllus  thanked  Origen  by  letter  for  the 
instruction  he  had  received.  We  have 
no  cause  to  doubt  this,  but  the  account 
of  Jerome  is  not  so  authentic  as  that  of 
Origen. 

Tlie  next  to  Beryllus  of  Bostra,  is  Sa- 
bellius,  who  lived  at  Ptolemais,  in  Penta- 
polis,  after  the  middle  of  the  third  cen- 
tury; and  who  may,  probably,  have  main- 
tained a  doctrine  more  curiously  deve- 
loped and  perfected,  than  any  other  of  this 
class,  but  unfortunately,  we  have  only 
an  imperfect  acquaintance  with  his  system 
as  to  the  internal  dependence  of  its  va- 
rious parts.  The  account  of  Epi])hanius, 
that  Sabellius  borrowed  the  germ  of  his 
doctrine  out  of  Apocryphal  Gospels,  and 
especially  from  one|  that  was  current  in 
Egypt,  and  bore  the  stamp  of  the  Jewish 


Theosophy  of  Alexandria,  is  by  no  means 
to  be  rejected.  In  this  Gospel,  Christ,  as 
a  teaciier  of  esoteric  wisdom,  commu- 
nicated this  to  his  disciples,  which  en- 
;  tirely  suited  the  Tiieosophic  disposition 
of  a  certain  class:  If  the  multitude,  which 
camiot  raise  itself  up  to  the  perception  of 
the  Supreme  simj)le  Unity,  hold  God  tlie 
Father,  the  Son,  and  tlie  Holy  Ghost  for 
different  Divine  beings,  tliey  must  acknow- 
ledge that  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  are 
only  one;  that  ihey  are  only  tiireedilliirent 
forms,  under  which  the  Supreme  Unity  in 
revealed.*  As  it  is  said  in  the  Clementiney 
that  God  is  either  a /LAom?,  or  a  (Jt;a,-,  just  ac- 
cording as  the  Divine  wisdom  is  hidden 
within  him,  as  his  soul  ;  or  as  it  works  ac- 
tively proceeding  forth  from  him,  as  the 
hand  that  creates  the  world  ;'];  so  also  Sa- 
bellius said  tliat  God  before  the  creation 
had  been  the  pure  Unity, ^  as  being  entirely 
hidden  within  his  own  Being,  and  not 
active  through  communication  [of  any  of 
his  attributes,  kc.,]  witli  any  thing  be- 
yond himself;  and  in  this  respect,  he 
called  God  the  Father ;  but,  at  the  crea- 
tion, this  unity  had  developed  itself  into  a 
Trinity.W     As,  according  t-o  the  apostle 


•  De  Vir.  III.  c.  60. 

I"  From  the  u-xyyiuzt  »xt"  Aij.!/TT«t/f. 


*  Epiphan.  Hseres.  52.  He  says  of  this  Gos. 
pel:  El*  ctiiTti)  yjg  TT'^yxrt  TUivrit  L;  iv  T-xfji^TTm 

ai/Tiv  Jiih'juvTo:  ni:  /ui^TXi:  tsv  ai/TJV  ilyxi 
YXxTigu,  t;v  cl'jt'jv  ihn  uhv,  t;'/  o-ut.v  ilvn  ayr.v 
Uvrjjux.  This  may  be  illustrated  hy  a  passage  in 
Phil,  de  Abrahamo,  f.  367.  (Kd.  Hoeschel.) 
where  it  is  said,  that  the  '.v  from  which  his  two 
supreme  i-jv^/xii:,  the.  TrtihTinii,  and  the  /Hnro.uh  pro- 
ceed, appears  cither  one,  or  threefold,  according 
to  the  greater  or  less  purified  condition  of  the 
souls  which  contemplate  it.  If  the  soul  has  ele- 
vated itself  above  the  revelation  of  God  in  the 
creation  to  the  intellectual  perception  (an- 
schauung,)  of  the  cv,  then  the  Trinity  glides  into 
Unity  to  its  view  :  it  looks  upon  one  Light,  from 
which  at  the  same  time  two  shades  proceed,  i.  e. 
God's  Being  and  those  two  operative  faculties 
[Wiirkungsweisen.  Lit.  the  modes  of  operation,] 
are  only  shades,  that  fall  from  his  overpowering 
Light.     T^iTHv    (^tvTU.Tii.v     evsr    vTiKUua'yj    kxtx- 

XltfJifiMil,  TiU  JUiV    !>;   CKTSC   TitV    S'   uXJ^'.IV    iuitt,    i;    ill" 

u:Tai/)^/^-,M«vaiv  u^3  tii/tcu  o-kiuv.     And  then  :  m- 

^i^it  Til  ijaT/JCH  SiXtUU,  TiTS  //SK  SV;-,  TITS  Si  T^ittV 
ipXVTUflU.V    'i/i(    /UiV,     iTXV    CK.^Cu:     X.tbx(JjiirX    »    ^•''Al*' 

■yimvx  /uoviSif  S-j:fJu.  Cri>2t<j-x,  &c.  'i'here  is  also 
a  remarkable  likeness  between  the  mode  of  ex- 
pres.sion  used  by  Sabellius,  and  that,  which  is  pe- 
culiar to  the  Clementine,  a  work  which  proceeded 
from  a  Juda;o-Chrislian  theosophist. 

f  Clementin.  H.  10,  c.  12.  kxtx  yt^  inTXTiv 
Kit  (Tua-TiViv   »  /Lf.'.vx:  iux:  jlva/  viui^triu. 

i  According  as  it  may  be  said  cither  <ru3-ri\KtT- 
6x1,  or  inTHvwSiv, 

§  K  xnuTTKiK'.:  fx'ivaji  to  iv,  according  to  Philo 

II  See  Athanas.  Orat.  iv.  c.  13  :  » /jtcvxc  TKxruy. 
du(rx  }iyoy'.  T^'ic     And   yet,  one  is  inclined  to 


SABELLIUS  S    DOCTRINES. — HIS   LOGOS. 


380 

St.  Paul,  there  is  one  Spirit,  and  yet  this 
one  Spirit  worketh  several  ways  through 
manifold  gifts  and  graces ;  thus,  also,  he 
says,  is  God  the  Father  one  and  the  same, 
but  he  pours  himself  abioad  in  the  Son, 
and  in  the  Holy  Ghost,*  under  which 
names  Sabellius  means  to  designate  only 
two  different  modes  of  operation  of 
the  same  Divine  subject;  namely,  God 
the  Father.  Therefore,  he  says  also, 
it  is  one  Divine  Being,  as  to  its  self-ex- 
istence, which  is  designated  by  two  dif- 
ferent names,  according  to  these  two  dif- 
ferent modes  of  operation — one  Divine 
Subject,  which  represents  itself  under  dif- 
ferent forms,  according  to  the  necessity  of 
each  occasion,  and  sometimes  speaks  as 
the  Father  and  sometimes  as  the  Son,  and 
sometimes  as  the  Holy  Ghost.|  Pie  had 
therefore,  no  scruple  in  using  the  language 
prevalent  in  the  Western  Church,  and 
saying  that  we  must  acknowledge  one 
God  in  three  persons  ;J  but  then  he  un- 
derstood under  the  word  Person,  nothing 
but  different  parts,  different  personifica- 
tions under  which  the  one  Divine  Subject 
presented  itself.  He  made  use  also  of 
the  following  comparison :  As  in  the 
Sun  we  must  separate  his  proper  sub- 
stance (the  ov,  the  fxoi/a?,)  the  round  body, 
from  the  warming  and  illuminating  power 
that  proceeds  from  it,  so  also  in  God 
we  must  distinguish  between  his  proper 
self-existent  Being,  and  the  enlightening 
power,  the  Logos,  and  the  Holy  Ghost, 


inquire  whether  he  supposed  that  the  //ovj?  un- 
folded itself  immediately  at  the  creation  into  a 
TWatc,  or  whether  it  was  not  originally  only  into  a 
S'ui;,  so  that  the  Tp/s-f,  took  its  first  origin  from  the 
emanation  of  the  Logos  into  human  nature.  In 
order  to  decide  on  this  point,  we  must  know  more 
of  the  manner  in  which  Sabellius  represented  to 
himself  the  i-elation  of  the  communication  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos,  and 
how  he  viewed  tlic  relation  of  God's  operation  in 
the  ISew  'I'estament,  to  that  in  the  Old.  It  were 
much  to  be  desired,  that  Origen  had  left  us  more 
distinct  accounts  of  those  whom  he  accuses,  in 
the  above  quoted  iragmcnt  of  his  Commentary  on 
the  Epistle  to  Titus,  of  making  the  Holy  Ghost 
as  relates  to  the  prophets,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  as 
regards  the  apostles,  two  difierent  things,  and 
whom  he  expressly  distinguishes  from  the  Gnos- 
tics ;  to  whom  one  would  at  first  be  inclined  to 
apply  this  passage,  were  it  not  for  that  express 
distinction. 

*    1.  c.  2.5,  iflTTTfg  intet^ii-  ^'jgia-juttToiv  i\<ri,  to  h 

JLVTO    TTVOilXrl,    oi-TOH    K'M  0    FlaTJ)?    0    UUTCif    i(JTl,    TTKU- 

Tuvircu  h  a-  Thv  k«  FIva/^Mi. 

■|"  liasil.  Ep.  210.     T(,v  uiiTiv  ©siv  ivu.  tcd  Ctc- 

Kit/AlVCe   (.VTO.    VeOC  Tis   IK-XfrcTi  7tdi('Jim7T'T!.WJi%   ytUUQ 

IxerufAigi^iVfjiinv  vuv  fxtv  Li  n<TSfi,  ny  it  L;  ytt,v,  vuv 
wf  TO  iytcv  llvivji/.u  St'Jhiyiabdit, 


the  power  that   warms,  glows  through 
and  vivifies  the  hearts  of  believers.* 

Sabellius  spoke  in  the  sense  above 
given,  of  a  Aoyo?  Tr^oi^o^iHo?,  and  of  a 
begetting  of  the  Logos,  which  preceded 
the  whole  creation,  without  which  no 
creation  could  have  taken  place.  No 
Being  could  have  existed,  if  the  thinking 
Divine  reason  had  not  become  a  speaking 
reason ;  if  the  Divine  Monas,  wrapt  up 
in  itself,  had  not  unfolded  itself  in  the 
words  of  creation.  In  this  sense  Sa- 
bellius said,  "  God,  being  silent,  is  in- 
operative ;  but  God  speaking,  is  effec- 
tive."! He  considered,  however,  hu- 
man souls  to  be  a  revelation  or  a  partial 
outbeaming  of  the  Divine  Logos,  in 
which  idea  he  followed  Philo  and  the 
Alexandrian  Churchmen;  reason  in  man. 
in  this  view,  is  nothing  but  a  feeble  re- 
flection of  that  reason  of  God,  wiiich  is 
active  in  communicating  itself.  There- 
fore, Sabellius  applied  what  he  had  said 
of  the  creation  in  general  to  man  in  par- 
ticular, "That  we  might  be  created," 
says  he,  "  the  Logos  proceeded  forth 
from  God  [or  was  begotten,]  and  no 
sooner  hath  it  gone  forth  from  God,  than 
behold  !  we  are  in  existence.";}; 

For  the  purpose  of  redeeming  the  souls 
of  men  that  were  akin  to  it,  the  Divine 
power  of  the  Logos  let  itself  down  into 
human  nature ;  and  the  whole  Spiritual 
personality  of  the  Logos  was  considered 
by  Sabellius,  as  a  certain  hypostatized 
outbeaming,  a  peculiar  modification  of 
the  Divine  Logos !  The  doctrine  of  a 
class  of  Jewish  Theologians,  that  God 
sends  forth  his  revealing  power,  the 
Logos,  from  himself,  and  recalls  it  to 
himself  again,  as  the  Sun  sends  forth  its 
beams  ;  that  the  appearance  of  angels, 
and  the  Theophanies  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, are  nothing  else  than  difierent  tran- 
sient ibrms  under  which  this  one  power 
of  God  appeared;§  this  theory  he  applied 


•  Epiphan.  Hseres.  62. 

■j"  Tov  ©Jcv  (T/aiTavTa  y.i)i  aiiVig^ytiTcv,  K-J-Kivvth  Si 
la-^vuv.    I.e.    Athanas.  iv.  c.  1 1. 

■f  Athanas.  iv.  25.  ivx  >i/jm<:  iniaSafAfi',  tt^uik- 
div  0  /c^oc,  Ka.t  7re_^oihBovTC,c  auTaj  to-^w.  These 
words  would  take  a  different  sense,  if  they  are  re- 
ferred to  the  xjuvo  KTia-K,  and  are  understood  of  the 
incarnation  of  the  Logos.  But,  both  from  the 
words  themselves,  and  from  the  context  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  quoted  by  Athanasius,  the 
most  natural  interpretation  is  that  given  above. 

§  Dial.  c.  Try  ph.  Jud.  358.  As  the  Light 
proceeds  from  the  Sun,  and  returns  to  it,  c-Jto);  a 
Tlu-TUP,   oruv  S'.vKinan   S'vv^/aiv   ciutcu   T^cTrnSav  Trim, 

K'M   CTSV  ^■.VKhTSU   TTUKIV  uVslffTiKKa  t'n  (JLUTOV^   [p.  372. 

Ed.  Jebb.— H.  J.  R.] 


DOCTRINES    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


to  the  Tlieophany  in  the  appearance  of  j 
Christ.  He  made  use  of  the  same  meta- ' 
phor,  that  the  Sun  was  like  a  beam,  that , 
issued  from  the  Sun,  and  returned  again 
into  God,  like  the  beam  to  the  Sun. 

It  may  be  doubted,  whether  he  used  the  | 
name,  *'  the  Son  of  God,"'  merely  for  the 
human  form  under  which  the  Logos  ap-  ' 
peared,  or  whether  he  applied  this  name  [ 
to  the  Xoyof  w^oipogixo?  on  its  first  origin.  [ 
As  he  spoke  of  an  original  generation  of  [ 
the  Logos,  and  was  generally  willing  to  ^ 
take  up  the  expressions  used  in  the 
Church,  it  would  suit  well  with  his 
whole  theory,  to  suppose  that  he  would  | 
have  no  scruple  in  applying  this  term,  in : 
the  sense  which  we  have  observed,  to  the  i 
Logos.* 

It  is  farther  certain,  that  Sabellius  as- 
ascribed    to  the   Redeemer  no  elernalhi- 
cnduring  personality ;    but  it    might  be  j 
doubtful,   whether   he    maintained,    that : 
God  did  not  recall  again  into  himself  the 
beam  that  had  proceeded  from  him,  until  { 
the  whole  work  of  redemption  with  all  its  j 
consequences  (after  the  general  resurrec- 
tion) was  completed,  or  whether  he  sup-  ] 
posed  that  God  had  taken  back  to  himself  j 
this  beam  immediately  on  the  ascension 
of  Christ.     The  words  of  Sabellius  sup- 
port the  first  view  :  "just  as  the  Logos 
was  begotten  for  our  sake,  so  also,  does  t 
he   return  back   again    after   us,  to  that , 
which  he  was  before,  so  that  he  may  be  j 
what  he  was,t  after  we  have  attained  to  j 
the  union  with  God,  to  which  we  are  des- 
tined ;"  (that  is  to  say,  after  man  through 
him  shall  have  attained    to   a  Being   in 
God,  analogous  to  the  Being  of  the  Logos  i 
in  God  ;)  on  the  contrary,  the  account  of 
Epiphanius,  who  appears   also  to   have 
had    the  words    of  Sabellius  before    his 
eyes,  especially  if  we  compare  it  with  the 
doctrines  of  that  Jewish  sect,  rather  sup- 
ports the  second  supposition.     And  there 
is    something  quite    accordant    with  the 
whole  Sabellian  theory  in  the  idea,  that 
after  God,  through  the   sinking  down  of 
this  one  perfect  beam  into  human  nature, 
had  again  restored  this  to  himself.t  he 

•  He  pronounced  an  Anathema  as^ainat  those, 
who  (lid  not  believe  in  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  which  he  nii^ht  do  in  his  own  sense 
of  those  terms.  See  Arnobii  conflictus  cum  Sera- 
pione.  Bibl.  Patr.  Lugd.  t.  8. 

I  Lib.  cit.  c.  12.  ju& yiuji;  uvar^i^uia  ii  JLtr.Tfg  I'-v. 

^  [The  word  "  dieselijc"  here  translated  "ffiis," 
grammatically  considered,  refers  to  "  human  na- 
ture" with  which  it  acp-ees ;  but  I  apprehend  it 
means  the  "  human  nature  of  Christ,  with  its  en- 
lightening beam  of  Divine  Light." — H.  J.  R.] 


38t 

should  in  its  stead  communicate  himself 
to  the  individual  souls  of  the  faithful 
through  individual  separate  beams  of  the 
same  divine  Life,  by  means  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  words  of  Sabellius  in  Atha- 
nasius  might  certainly  refer  to  something 
else ;  namely,  they  niight  mean,  that 
after  every  thing  had  been  restored  to 
unity  with  God,  the  whole  Spiritual  crea- 
tion would  be  in  immediate  connection 
with  God, and  then  the  Trias  would  also 
subside  into  the  Monas,  the  Myo<;  w^o^o- 
fixof  and  the  Xc,yo<;  tviJiaOsro-;  :  and  llien 
nothing  else  would  exist  than  the  One* 
simple  Divine  Being,  at  repose  within 
itself  with  the  blessed  Spirits  reposing 
within  him.  But  wiiat  opinion  Saljellius 
mav  have  held  with  respect  to  the  en- 
during personality  of  souls,  we  cannot 
state  with  any  certainty  from  the  defi- 
ciency of  any  authentic  vouchers.! 

The  Church  doctrine  formed  itself  in 
opposition  to  both  these  classes  of  31  o- 
narchians,  and  sought  to  maintain  the 
substantial  [selbstiindig]  personal  Being 
of  the  Logos.  While  these  Monarchians 
considered  the  self-revelation  of  God  in 
the  Xoyoi;  w^ofpo^ixo?,  as  only  a  certain  ac- 
tivity of  the  JDivine  nature,  in  which  the 
Avhole  creation  was  called  into  existence  ; 
the  Church  teachers,  on  the  contrary, 
supposed  a  self-revelation  of  God,  pre- 
ceding the  whole  creation,  and  forming 
the  foundation  of  it :  which  self-revelation 
consisted  in  a  Being,  emanating  from 
God  with  the  attribute  of  personality,  re- 
presenting the  Divine  Being  of  God,  and 
realizing  his  first  conceived  ideas ;  this 
Being  was  the  substantial  Word,  in  which 
the  Divine  thouffht  came  forth  into  crea- 


•  In  the  tliayyvj^M  KdT  AiytrrrKv;  also,  which 
Sabellius  used,  the  doctrine  that  all  opposites  will 
at  last  be  lost  in  unity,  appears  to  be  brought 
forward;  for  there,  in  answer  to  the  inquiry  of 
Solomon,  when  the  kingdom  of  Christ  was  to 
come  ;  Christ  gives  the  answer,  "  when  Two  be- 
come One,  and  the  outward  like  the  inward,  and 
the  male  like  the  female;  when  there  is  no  farther 
distinction  of  sexes." 

I  According  to  this  view,  we  can  understand 
how  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (Euseb.  vii.  6,) 
might  accuse  Sabellius  of  having  spoken  in- 
juriously of  God  the  Father  (as  the  expression 
of  the  evolution  of  the  Divine  Monas  into 
a  Trias  must  have  apjicarcd  to  a  follower  of 
Origen,)  and  of  great  unbelief  in  regard  to  the 
Logos,  who  became  man  (inasmuch  as  he  looked 
upon  Him  as  only  a  transient  manifestation  of 
Divine  power,)  and  of  great  insensibility  (,.»(Ut. 
Sxj-ja)  in  respect  to  the  Holy  Ghost  (because  he 
denied  the  reality,  and  the  objectivity  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  understood  under  that  name  only  indi- 
vidual transient  outpourings  of  Divine  power.) 


382 


ORIGEN  S    DOCTRINES. 


tive  activity.*  They  said,  "  While  the 
word  of  man  is  onl)'^  the  transient  ex- 
pression of  his  thought;  on  the  contrary, 
out  of  the  Supreme  and  entirely  perfect 
Being,  nothing  can  come  forth  as  his  self- 
revelation  (or  the  first  act  of  the  commu- 
nication of  Life  iVom  God,)  which  is  not 
substantia!,  real,  and  objective."  They 
conceived  to  themselves  this  Logos  as  the 
most  perfect  outpouring  of  the  Divine 
Being,  and  they  made  the  doctrine  of  the 
unity  of  God  (the  (/.ovoc^^tac)  to  consist  in 
supposing  the  Divine  Logos  to  be  nothing 
but  an  outpouring  from  the  Divine  First 
Being  [Urwesen,"]  who  revealed  himself 
through  this  Logos,  and  works  by  means 
of  him.  But  still  by  degrees  this  idea, 
in  the  conceptions  formed  of  it,  was  de- 
veloped in  two  different  and  opposite 
ways  ;  the  one  prevailing  in  the  Western, 
the  other  in  the  Eastern  Church. 

In  regard  to  the  latter,  the  fashioning 
which  this  doctrine  received  from  the 
philosophical  spirit  of  the  Alexandrian 
school,  and  especially  of  Origen,  had  a 
very  great  influence  upon  it,  and  we  can- 
not fail  to  recognise  the  influence  also, 
which  the  system,  from  which  his  philo- 
sophical notions  were  derived,  had  exerted 
upon  him.  Although  the  Christian  spirit 
had  leavened  his  speculative  ideas,  al- 
though his  "God  the  Father"  is  some- 
thing different  from  the  supreme,  simple 
principle  of  the  Neo-Platonists,  the  of, 
Avhich  was  to  them  a  mere  abstract  idea 
of  perfection,  although  his  Logos  is  some- 
thing different  from  the  vovi;  of  the  Neo- 
Platonist,  absorbed  in  ideal  contemplation 
of  itself;  yet  the  speculative  form,  under 
which  he  had  viewed  things  from  this 
philosophy  had  certainly  great  effect  in 
modifying  his  conception  of  this  doctrine. 
We  shall  now  view  the  ideas  of  this  pro- 
found man,  in  their  proper  connection 
with  each  other. 

That  which  is  to  be  called  God  abso- 


*  [Lest  I  should  have  failed  to  represent  by  a  ' 
literal  translation  the  meaning  of  my  author,  I 
will  merely  state  what  appears  to  me  to  constitute 
the   ditFerence  which  he  wishes  to  establish  be-  ' 
tween  these  two  views.     The  first  considers  the 
creation  itself  to  be  the  act  of  this  Divine  energy  of 
God  set  into  activity,  and  thus  the  creation  is  the 
only  manifestation  of  the  thought  of  God,  and  is 
the  Kvyoc  !roi<pip;Ko;.     The  second, on  the  contrary, 
maintains  that,  previous  to  the  creation,  and  in- 
dependent of  it,  there  was  a  manifestation  of  God,  '^ 
and  a  conversion  of  the  xt,j.c«c  hSuScn',  into  the 
T^cycc   TTfi-.rp'.piKo;.     This  Acyoc  TrfxpooMX  has  a  per-  I 
sonal  existence,  and  hy  means  of  him  God  created  ! 
the  world.— H.  J.  R.f  I 


j  lutely,*  is  the  original  source  of  all  being 
the  source  of  Divine  life,  and  of  blessed 
I  ness  for  a  blessed  world  of  spirits  which 
is  akin  to  him,  and  also  elevated  by  com- 
munion with  him  above  the  bounds  of 
temporary  existence,  and  thus  rendered 
:  divine.  The  higher  spirits,  in  virtue  of 
:  this  Divine  life,  communicated  to  them 
^  by  means  of  their  communion  with  that 
j  original  Divine  Being,  may,  in  a  certain 
sense,  be  called  Divine  Beings  or  Gods.f 
But  as  the  avTo^eo^  is  the  original  source 
of  all  being,  and  all  Divine  life,  so  also 
is  the  Acyo;,  the  indispensable  medium 
through  which  all  communication  of  life 
from  him  must  flow.  This  is  the  collected 
revelation  of  the  glory  of  God,  the  uni- 
versal all-embracing  image  of  the  glory, 
from  out  of  which  the  partial  beams  of 
the  Divine  glory  spread  themselves  over 
the  whole  world  of  Spirits.:]: 

Now  as  there  is  only  One.  Divine 
First  Being.§  there  is  also,  One  Divine 
First  Reason, II  the  Absolute  Reason, 
through  which  alone  the  eternal  Supreme 
Being  reveals  himself  to  all  other  beings, 
which  is  the  source  of  truth  to  all  them, 
the  objective  subtantial  truth  itself.  With 
Origen  it  is  a  great  point  to  maintain 
firmly,  that  every  particular  class  of  rea- 
sonable beings  has  not  its  own  subjective 
reason,  nor  every  separate  intelligence; 
but  that  there  is  one  objective  Logos  for 
all,  just  as  there  is  one  objective  absolute 
truth  for  all,  the  one  truth  of  God-con- 
sciousness, which  unites  man  with  all 
classes  in  the  world  of  Spirits.  "  Every 
one,"  he  says,  "  will  concede  that  truth 
is  One,  and  in  respect  of  truth,  no  one 
can  venture  to  say,  that  there  is  one  truth 
of  God,  another  truth  of  angels,  another 
of  men ;  for  in  the  nature  of  things  there 
is  One  truth  only  in  respect  to  every 
single  thing.  But  now  if  truth  is  One,  so 
must  also  the  development  of  truth,  which 
is  wisdom,  if  thought  of  properly,  be 
thought  of  as  One  also;  because  every 
false  appearance  of  wisdom  embraces  not 
the  truth,  and  does  not  deserve  to  be  called 
wisdom.  But  if  there  be  then  One  truth 
and  one  wisdom,  the  Logos  which  reveals 
the  truth  ami  wisdom  to  all  who  are  ca- 
pable of  receiving  it,  will  be  One  also." 
But  although  the  Logos  as  to  his  nature 
and  being,  is  absolutely  One;  yet  he  pre- 
sents himself  under  a   variety  of  forms 

*   The  awAojc  flfjf,  eturcBlos. 

■j"    ^STO^l)  TK  iKflVCV  di.rtircf  BtOTTOIOV/UiVOI. 


i  .loh.  li.  c.  ii.  32  ; 

§  The  ctuTcflMf. 


18. 

11  The  nuToKoyo;. 


ORIGEN    ON    THE    LOGOS. 


and  modes  of  operation,  according  to  the 
different  conditions  and  necessities  of  rea- 
sonable beings,  to  whom  he  is  every 
thing,  wliich  is  needful  for  their  salvation, 
(see  above.)  Wliere  tlie  Gnostics,  from 
the  different  modes  of  operation  of  the 
One  Redeemer,  and  according  to  the  dif- 
ferent conditions  of  his  operations,  sup- 
posed different  hypostases,  Origen  re- 
duced these  diiferent  hypostases  to  differ- 
ent conceptions  and  relations;  but  just 
as  he  opposed  this  fasliion  of  hypostatiz- 
ing  every  thing,  so  he  opposed  himself 
also  to  the  Monarchians  who  reduced  the 
whole  Trias  (or  Trinity)  only  to  different 
conceptions  and  relations  under  wliich 
the  One  Divine  Being  is  vievved.  Who- 
soever denied  tlie  subtantial  existence  of  | 
the  Divine  Logos,  appeared  to  him  to  re-  j 
duce  every  thing  into  that  which  is  sub- 
jective, to  deny  tlie  existence  of  an  abso-  : 
lute  objective  truth,  and  to  make  it  a  mere 
abstract  idea  [abslracfiun^]  for  he  could  \ 
not  think  of  the  Divine  Logos  in  any  : 
otlier  way,  tlian  as  he  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  think  of  the  novi  of  the  Neo- 
Platonists.  "  None  of  us,"  says  Origen, ! 
c.  Cels.  viii.  12,  "  has  so  debased  a  mind, 
as  to  think  that  the  Being  of  truth*  had 
no  subsumtial  existence  before  the  appear- 
ance of  Christ  on  earth." 

As  Origen  explained  all  designations 
of  the  Logos  as  symbolical,  he  looked 
upon  the  name  Logos  in  this  light,  and  | 
he  spoke  against  those,  who  built  exclu-  j 
sively  upon  this  name,  and  made  the  com-  ! 
parison  w-ith  ihe  ^o7o;  Trpopopixo?  always  j 
applicable,  which  to  him,  as  a  philo-  i 
sophical  thinker,  appeared  too  human, 
and  one  which  would  not  allow  the 
Logos  to  be  represented  as  something 
having  a  substantial  existence.|  The  re- 
presentation which  up  to  this  time  had 
been  current :  that  God  before  the  crea- 
tion had  caused  the  substantial  Word  to 
emanate  from  his  Reason,  in  which  he 
had  conceived  the  plan  of  the  world, 
which  was  to  be  executed  by  the  Word, 
and  that  he  had  caused  his  thought  to 
become  the  Word,  was  banished,  together 
with  that  comparison  by  the  philosophical 
spirit  of  Origen ;  because  he  could  not 
allow  the  propriety  of  transferring  in  this 
manner  the  relations  of  time  to  the  Eter- 
nal.     Acknowledging   no    beginning   of  j 


fx'.u   K'jy.'i   (iyihi^y  -if.  44.  1.     oio^stu/  7rg;<?og-xi'  7tx- 
rejxjii/  ilivit   iv   trjKKoi8xji  Kii/maio  ilvut  rot  Tuv  tow 


383 

creation,  but  supposing  an  eternal  crea- 
I  tion,  he  could  still  less  acknowledge  a 
beginning  in  tliis  case,  and  he  endeavoured 
to  remove  every  consideration  of  lime 
from  the  idea  of  the  generation  of  the 
Logos,  and  to  maintain  that  we  must 
think  of  a  "  present,"  without  any  deter- 
mination of  time,  [lU.  a  timeless  present; 
an  eternal  now,]  which  he  believed  to  he 
intimated  in  the  ''  to-day"  of  Ps.  ii.  7. 
What  the  Platonists  said  of  the  relation 
of  the  iv  to  the  »oy,',  tliat  the  revelation  of 
the  former  in  tlie  latter  is  contempora- 
neously co-existent  with  the  former,  he 
applied  to  the  relation  of  God  the  Father 
to  the  Logos,  that  the  reffection  of  the 
glory  of  God  in  the  Son  is  co-existent 
with  its  own  existence ;  and  thus,  that 
always  this  redeclion  had  been  present 
with  the  glory  after  a  manner,  which 
is  indepeiuleiit  upon  time.*  And  thus 
he  was  peculiarly  instrumental  in  esta- 
blishing the  notion  of  an  eternal  gene- 
ration. 

While  Origen  endeavoured  to  conceive 
the  idea  of  the  generation  of  the  Son 
after  the  most  spiritual  manner  possible, 
he  declared  himself  strongly  against  all 
sensuous  conceptions  of  it,  and  against 
all  such  expressions  as  might  give  occa- 
sion to,  or  favour  them  at  all.  On  this 
account  he  rejected  the  phrase  of  a  gene- 
ration out  of  the  substance  of  the  Fatlier.t 
(which,  on  the  contrary,  was  used  in  the 
western  Church,  in  order  to  distinguish 
the  Son  of  God  from  all  creatures,)  be- 
cause this  expression,  it  appeared  to  him, 
might  easily  be  used  to  favour  the  notion 
of  a  sensuous  partition  of  the  Divine 
Being.J 

As  the  idea  of  a  generation  out  of  the 

*  Joh.  i.  32.  T.  ii.  c.  I ;  ii.  9.  In  Jerein.  iii. 
181. 

t  ymiirii:  Ik  th:  o'jtix;  tm  Qi-.u- 

i  In  opposition  to  those,  who  falsely  explained 
the  pa-ssage  of  St.  John  viii.  44,  of  the  generation 
of  the  Son.  T.  20,  Joli.  c.  16.  Ckku  it  ry  j--«\9;k 
UT3  ©i.u,  SiMy)i^t.tro  uVT/  T',v  yiyiyxu-u  .(T3  tcu  e)s;w,  w'f 
LKcA.ci/5a  ix  T«c  <,-j<rn.:  <i3.TKiiv  tco  FlxTgic  yr)Bi»>ir&n 
t;v  Tm,  oiovu  fA.U:u.ii:u  ku  Xi.'TiVTic  Tii  si/x«i,  » 
TT^iri^'jt  sl^f  S:.yuu.Tn  OvSe^wTut  juvf  cvi^  •fjrir  .i:j3t- 
T;y  K-u  uircufjurzt  7rijiitvru3-/ui.!sav.  In  the  re|)ort  of 
a  discussion  between  ()ri£;en  ami  CanJiJus  the 
Valcntinian,  a  passaf^e  occurred  in  which  the  for- 
mer attacked  an  expression  made  use  of  by  the 
more  ancient  Church  doctors,  as  Justin,  for  ex- 
ample, (viz.  a  ^^-^jkii  tK  TKf  oia-iti;  t'.v  t*t^'-c,) 
without  any  scruple, — nc  Deus  Pater  divi.latur  in 
partes,  and,  on  the  contrary,  in  order  to  remove 
the  idea  of  a  necessity  resultint;  from  the  na- 
ture of  thitii^s,  he  maintained  that  the  S)n  of 
God  had  received  his  existence  from  the  will 
of  the  Father.     Lib.  ii.  adv.  Rutin,  t.  iv.  1 13. 


384 

substance  {lit.  the  Being)  of  God  ap- 
peared to  Origen  to  be  too  sensuous, 
it  was  also  a  concomitant  of  this  caution 
on  his  part,  that  he  thouglit  it  entirely 
necessary  to  maintain  strictly  the  absolute 
superiority  of  God  the  Father  the  avro- 
6ioc.  in  respect  to  his  nature,  over  every 
other  Being,  just  as  he  had,  indeed,  been 
accustomed  as  a  Platonist,  to  consider 
the  ov  as  something  incomparable  with 
any  thing  else,  and  as  elevated  in  his  na- 
ture, even  above  the  ^oy?  itself.  Jt  ap- 
peared to  him,  therefore,  injurious  towards 
the  Great  First  Being,  to  suppose  any 
equality  of  nature  or  unity  between  him 
and  any  other  Being,  were  it  even  the  Son 
of  God  himself.  As  the  Son  of  God  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  are  incomparably  elevated 
above  every  thing  else,  even  above  the 
highest  grades  of  the  spiritual  world ;  so 
much,  or  more  than  this,  is  the  Father 
elevated  above  him.*  This  distinction 
between  the  nature  of  the  Son  of  God, 
and  of  the  Fatherj  would  necessarily  be 
brought  prominently  forward  by  Origen 
against  the  Monarchians,  because  they 
denied  not  only  the  difference  of  nature, 
but  even  the  distinction  of  the  persons; 
and  thus,  on  account  of  the  connected 
nature  of  his  philosophical  and  Christian 
system  it  was  a  point  of  practical  import- 
ance to  Origen  to  maintain  against  them 
the  personal  substantiality  of  the  Logos. 
Sometimes,  in  the  course  of  this  con- 
troversy, he  distinguishes  between  unity 
of  nature  and  a  personal  unity,  or  unity 
of  substance  [subjects-einheit,  lit.suhjcct- 
or  substance-  unity]  so  that  he  only  under- 
takes to  controvert  the  latter  idea.J  This 
was  the  matter  which  was  practically  the 
most  important  to  him  to  maintain,  and 
he  must  liave  been  well  aware  that  many 
Church-teachers,  who  held  a  distinction 
of  persons,  at  the  same  time  maintained 
an  unity  of  nature.§  But  in  virtue  of 
the  intimate  connection  of  his  own  sys- 
tem, as  a  system,  both  these  opinions 
would  give  way  together,  and  when  he 
spoke  as  from  the  position  taken  by  that 
system,  he  maintained  both  the  Ite^otj)? 
T5??  oiiffiK^  and  the  ereporrn  t>j<;  inroa-raaici^ 

or   TOU    iTTOKEJfAEVOU.jl 


GENERATION    OUT    OF    SUBSTANCE. 


•   T.   13.  Job.  c.  25. 

■(-  The  doctrine  of  an  sts^otxc  a»c  oia-ixi;  main- 
tained in  opposition  to  that  of  the  i/ucuvi-iov. 
■^  T.  10.     Joh.  against   those  who  said   iv  cu 

fJlCVOV    CU^l:l    C'XX-X  KiJ  CtcKSI fAiVCfi  Tiry'Jf^'^Vil  u/U!pOTiecv:' 

§   [Wesen-cinhcit,  oneness  of  being.  See  Wil- 
son  on  the  New  Testament,  p.  521. — H.  .f.  R.] 
II   In  Joh.  ii.  t.  ii.     Do  Oral.  c.  15.  nctr'  oh<nnv 


From  this  doctrine  he  drew  the  prac- 
tical consequence,  that  we  must  pray  to 
the  Father  and  not  to  the  Son,  from  which 
it  is  clear,  how  much  in  a  Christian  and 
practical  point  of  view,  the  Patripassians 
(whom  Origen  accused  of  knowing  only 
the  Son,  and  being  unable  to  raise  them- 
selves up  to  the  Father)  must  have  thought 
themselves  obliged  to  exert  themselves 
against  such  a  system.  But  still  Clirist 
was,  nevertheless,  to  Origen,  as  he  himself 
declared,  with  full  conviction  from  the 
connection  of  his  philosophical  and 
Christian  system,  the  way,  the  truth,  and 
the  life ;  he  knew  no  other  way  to  the 
Father,  no  other  source  of  truth,  and  of 
Divine  life  for  all  creatures,  than  him, 
"  the  mirror,  by  means  of  which  Paul 
and  Peter,  and  all  who  are  like  to  them, 
beheld  God."*  He  says,  that  in  some 
respects,  we  may  agree  with  the  Gnostics, 
tliat  the  Father  was  not  revealed  before 
Christ  revealed  him,  that  men  till  that 
time,  had  known  only  the  Creator  and  the 
Lord  of  the  world,  and  that  it  was 
through  the  Son  that  they  had  first 
known  him  as  their  Father,  and  by  the 
spirit  of  adoption  received  from  him,  had 
become  capable  of  calling  to  him  as  to  a 
father.f  He  acknowledged  him  to  be 
the  mediator,  a  confidence  in  whom  must 
penetrate  the  whole  inward  life  of  Chris- 
tians and  unite  them  with  God,  in  his 
name  and  through  him.  Christians  must 
always  pray  to  God  the  Father.  Origen 
says,  "  How  can  we  in  the  sense  of  him, 
who  said,  '  Why  dost  thou  call  me  good, 
there  is  none  good,  save  only  God  the 
Father;'  avoid  saying  also,  '  Why  dost 
thou  pray  to  me }  thou  must  pray  only  to 
the  Father,  to  whom  I  also  pray  I'  As 
ye  have  learned  from  Holy  Scripture,  ye 
must  not  pray  to  him  who  is  appointed 
by  the  Father  to  be  your  high  priest,  and 
who  has  received  from  your  Father  the 
office  of  being  your  advocate ;  but  you 
must  pray  through  your  high  priest  and 
your  advocate,  through  him  wlio  can 
have  sympathy  with  your  feebleness,  who 
was  in  all  things  tempted  like  unto  you, 
but  by  the  gift  of  the  Father  without  sin. 
Learn  also  what  a  gift  ye  have  received 
from  my  Father,  by  reccivitig  througli  a 
new  birth  in  me  the  spirit  of  adoption,  so 
as  to  be  called  the  sons  of  God,  and  my 
brethren."!  -^"*^  ^'^"^  ^''^"^^  *^^^  grounds 
already  pointed,  as  we  see,  by  Origen,  a 
controversy  arose  against   the   doctrine, 


•  T.  13.  Joh.  c.  25.     t  T,  19.  Joh.  1.  iv.  286. 
t  De  Oral.  c.  15. 


COUNCIL    AT    ANTIOCH. 


that  the  Son  of  God  was  hpgotten  of  the 
Father,  and  against  tliat  of  an  unity  of 
nature  between  them  both,  from  -wliicli 
controversy,  an  opposition  was  afterwards 
to  arise  between  tlie  eastern  and  the  west- 
ern Churches ;  for  in  the  latter  of  these 
Churclies,  the  doctrine  of  one  Divine 
Being  in  tliree  numerically  ditfcrent  per- 
sons, was  already  become  predominant. 

When  we  compare  Origen  and  Tertul- 
lian  together,  we  learn  liow  the  concep- 
tion of  tlie  same  Christian  truth  may  be 
formed  differently  in  persons,  according 
to  the  diiference  of  their  spiritual  cha- 
racter and  education.  TertuUian  accus- 
tomed to  sensible  representations  of  the 
Supreme  Being,  could  not  find  the  difli- 
culties,  which  met  the  philosophizing 
Origen.  With  his  sensuous  notions  of 
emanation,  he  could  easily  make  it  clear 
to  himself,  how  tlie  Divinity  could  cause 
a  being  to  proceed  out  of  his  own  sub- 
stance, which  possessed  this  same  sub- 
stance, only  in  a  smaller  decree,  and  bore 
the  same  relation  to  the  Divinity  that  the 
sunbeam  does  to  tlie  sun.  Hence,  he 
acknowledged  one  Divine  Being  in  three 
persons  intimately  united  together.* 

The  Son  [according  to  this  view]  does 
not  differ  in  number  from  the  Father  in 
relation  to  the  Divine  Nature,  inasmuch 
as  the  same  Nature  of  God  is  in  the  Son 
also;  but  he  differs  in  degree,  inasmuch 
as  he  is  a  smaller  portion  of  the  common 
whole  of  the  Divine  Being.f  This  be- 
came the  prevailing  view  in  the  Western 
Church;  viz.  one  and  the  same  Divine 
Nature  in  the  Father  and  the  Son;  but  a 
subordination  withal  in  the  relation  of 
the  Son  to  the  Father.  But  while  tlie 
interior  Christian  life  impelled  men  con- 
stantly to  make  the  distinction  between 
Christ  and  all  creatures,  always  more  and 
more  sharply  defined,  and  while  on  the 
other  hand  the  idea  of  the  Unity  of  God 
was  constantly  more  and  more  definitely 
conceived,  particularly  by  the  spirit  of 
the  western  people,  so  the  notions  of  this 
subordination  would  necessarily  be  more 
driven  into  the  background. 

Tlie  form  of  doctrine,  which  had  formed 
itself  in  the  Alexandrian  school,  was  now 
again  brought  more  prominently  forward 
in  the  second  half  of  the  third  century, 
during  the  controversy  against  the  sys- 
tems of  Sabellius,  and  of  Paul  of  Samo- 


385 


sata.  In  the  controversy  against  the  latter, 
the  expression  ofjLoovTtiv  was  condemned 
by  a  council  at  Antioch,*  a  circumstance 
wiiich  is  of  importance  as  an  introduction 
to  the  controversies  of  the  next  century."]" 
We  see  already  the  seed  of  a  contro- 
versy between  the  system  of  Origen,  and 
the  system  of  the  UnityJ  in  Trinity,  which 
was  constantly  becoming  more  strongly 
defined  in  the  Romish  Church,  and  a 
protype  of  the  doctrinal  controversies 
of  the  fourth  century,  Dionysius,  the 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  issued  a  pastoral 
letter  against  the  doctrines  of  Sabenius,§ 
which  were  spreading  themselves  abroad 
in  the  province  of  Pentapolis,  a  district, 
the  churches  of  which  were  under  the 
superintendence  of  the  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria. In  this  letter  in  contradiction  to 
the  Sabcllian  confusion  of  persons  [hy- 
postases] he  brought  forward  in  conse- 
quence of  that  heresy  tlie  difference  be- 
tween the  Son  of  God  and  the  Father  still 
more  strongly,  and  made  use  of  many 
inappropriate  comparisons,  and  hard  ex- 
pressions, which  he  would  not  probably 
have  used,  if  he  had  not  been  carried  to 
extremes  by  means  of  this  contrast  be- 
tween the  two  systems,  and  which  miglit 
be  so  understood,  as  if  he  acknowledged 
no  essential  difference  of  nature  between 
the  Son  of  God  and  created  beings,  and 
as  if  he  ascribed  a  temporal  commence- 
ment of  existence  to  the  Son ;  he  declared 
himself  against  the  word  Hoinousioti. 
j\Iany,  who  were  offended  by  the  expres- 
sions he  used,  complained  of  them  to 
Dionysius,  the  bishop  of  Rome,  who 
thereupon  issued  a  letter,  in  which  he 
contradicted  those  who  denied  the  unity 
of  nature  in  the  Trinity  [Trias,]  who 
placed  the  Son  of  God  in  the  rank  of  a 
creature,  and  assigned  him  a  beginning 
of  existence  in  time,  as  well  as  the  Sabel- 


*   Una  substantia  in  trilius  cohaerentibas. 
■j-  Dcus  de   Deo,  modulo  alter,  nou  numero. 
Adv.  Praxeam. 

49 


*  See  e.  g.  Athanas.  de  Synod.  §  43,  and 
Hilar,  de  Synodis,  §  86. 

"t"  As  this  may  be  explained  so  naturally  by  the 
doctrinal  conceptions  of  the  Aloxaiulrian  school, 
and  also  the  ground  brought  fonvard  by  the  coun- 
cil against  this  expression  of  the  Church  is  quite 
in  accordance  with  this,  this  account  has  hence, 
an  a  priori  probability.  The  Arians,  from  whom 
it  comes,  are,  however,  suspicious  witnesses  in 
this  respect;  but  the  circumstance  that  neither 
Athanasius,  Hilary  of  Poictiors,  nor  B.xsil  of  (^a;- 
sarca,  their  bitter  opponents,  who  quote  from  their 
mouths,  contradict  them  in  the  matter,  may  pass 
as  a  voucher  for  its  credibility. 

t  [Wesenseinheit.  Literally,  Unity  of  Being, 
or  nature. — H.  J.  H.] 

§  The  lctt3r  to  Ammonius  and  Nicanor. 

2K 


386 

lians.  If  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  (who 
would  easily  be  able  to  show  that  people 
had  fastened  too  severely  on  single  ex- 
pressions of  his,  instead  of  explaining 
these  expressions  according  to  a  general 
view  of  his  ideas)  had  at  once  maintained 
obstinately  his  opposition  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Roman  Church,  and  had  proclaimed 
these  points  of  difterence  more  definitely, 
this  would  have  sounded  a  tocsin  to  a 
contest  of  doctrines,  in  which  the  Eastern 
and  Western  church  might  possibly  have 
taken  part.  But  Dionysius  acted  in  the 
spirit  of  moderation,  which  held  fast  what 
is  material,  and  avoided  contests  on  in- 
comprehensible Divine  things;  a  modera- 
tion which  had  passed  from  the  great 
Origen  to  his  worthy  scholar.  Without 
manifesting  any  resentment  against  his 
accusers,  who  had  appealed  to  a  foreign 
bishop,  who  was  glad  enough  to  set  him- 
self up  as  a  judge  over  other  churches, 
without  manifesting  any  resentment  to- 
wards the  latter  himself  [the  bishop  of 
Rome,]  who  appears  to  have  spoken  more 
in  the  tone  of  a  judge,  than  in  that  of  a  col- 
league in  the  office  of  bishop,  he  developed 
with  composure  and  sound  thought,  the 
meaning  of  his  expressions  which  had 
been  misunderstood,  and  endeavoured 
while  doing  this,  to  avoid  as  much  as 
possible  any  opposition  to  the  Roman 
doctrine.  He  supplied  also,  according  to 
the  mode  of  Origen,  what  was  requisite 
to  complete  the  idea  of  the  eternal  gene- 
ration of  the  Logos.  He  was  willing  even 
to  allow  the  validity  of  the  word  ot^oivaiav^ 
as  far  as  it  was  applied  only  to  denote 
the  affinity  of  nature  between  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  and  to  separate  the  Son  from 
all  creatures,  although  he  might  say 
against  it,  that  this  word  had  hitherto 
never  been  in  use  in  the  Church,  and  did 
not  occur  in  the  Holy  Scriptures:  which, 
however,  it  must  be  acknowledged,  is  not 
a  satisfactory  objection  to  make  to  a  doc- 
trinal expression:  because  the  changes 
wiiich  take  place  in  the  general  develop- 
ment of  mind  in  a  doctrinal  point  of  view, 
and  new  errors  arising  in  it,  may  render 
new  expressions  necessary;  and  because 
the  only  point  of  any  importance  here  is, 
that  the  idea,  which  the  doctrinal  expres- 
sion is  to  denote,  can  be  deduced  from 
the  Scriptures.  By  this  self-denial  of 
Dionysius  (in  which  he  showed  more  of 
the  spirit  of  Christ,  and  did  more  to 
honour  him,  than  if  he  had  maintained 
the  unity  of  nature  by  dialectic  rules,) 
the  controversy  was  put  aside,  and  a  divi- 
sion, which  miffht  have  torn  asunder  the 


THE    HOLY   SPIRIT. 


bond  of  Christian  communion,  was  thus 
avoided.* 

It  will  appear  from  what  we  have  re- 
marked above,  that  the  development  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  closely 
connected  with  that  of  the  Son  of  God. 
We  see  also  here,  how  completely  reli- 
gion is  a  thing  of  life,  before  it  can  obtain 
for  itself  an  adequate  form  of  develop- 
ment in  definite  conceptions,  and  we  see 
the  want  of  correspondence  which  must 
arise  between  the  inward  life  and  con- 
science, and  the  conceptions  of  the  mind, 
until  Christianity  has  penetrated  the 
whole  of  man's  nature.  In  that  age  of 
the  first  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on 
human  nature,  while  the  new  life  com- 
municated by  Christ  to  human  nature, 
the  life  in  communion  with  God,  was 
felt  so  powerfully,  and  while  its  ope- 
rations against  the  corrupted  heathen 
world  were  so  strongly  marked  there 
were  generally  wanting  ideas  of  ii,,  cor- 
responding to  the  nature  of  that  Spirit, 
whose  power  was  felt  to  be  Divine. 

The  Church-teachers,  in  virtue  of  the 
modes  of  mental  conception  in  those 
days,  could  not  (if  we  except  the  Monar- 
chians  above  mentioned  and  Lactantius)"*" 
maintain  the  reality  and  objective  exist- 
ence of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  any  other  way 
than  by  representing  it  to  themselves  as  a 
personal  substantial  being.  They  were 
therefore,  compelled  by  their  system  of 
subordination,  to  consider  the  Holy  Ghost 
as  a  being  subordinate  both  to  the  Father 
and  the  Son.  Justin  Blartyr,  for  ex- 
ample, who  certainly  spoke  with  a  just 
interior  experience  of  that,  wliicli  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  for  the  interior  life  of  the 
Christian  ;  calls  him  "the  angel  of  God, 
the  power  of  God  sent  to  us  through 
.Tesus  Christ,  which  defends  them  [Chris- 
tians,] from  the  assaults  of  the  evil  spirit, 
and  compels  him  to  leave  them."J     With 


*  See  the  fragments  of  the  letter  of  Dionysius 
to  Ammonius  and  Eu[)hraaor,  and  of  the  second 
letter  under  the  title,  6X?),;^oc  xa<  uiTroK'.yfL:  ia 
Athanasius  dc  Sentenlia  Dionysii  et  de  Decretis 
Synodi  NicenfE. 

•j-  Who  appears  to  have  declared  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  be  the  sanctifying  power  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  "  cum  vel  ad  I'atrem  referri  vel  ad 
Filium ;  et  sanctifieationem  utriusque  personae 
sub  ejus  nomine  demonstrari."  See  Hieionym. 
ep.  41.  ad  Pamach.  et  Ooeanum. 

I  Dialog,  c.  Tryph.  .lud.  .344.  o  cyyfKK  tou 
©set/,  TOUT  '((Tjiv  ti  Suvu/uk;  tcu  ©s;u  m  irf/u^OiaiL  ti/uiv 
Siu.  'lucriu  Xgia-Ti,v,  irntuu.  a/yrm  k*i  u/^ivmTua 
a<^'  ifxcey.  This  affords  a  key  to  the  passage 
in  the  Apolog.  ii.  ed.  Colon,  p.  56,  which  is 
often  found  diiBcult ;  "  we  reverence  the  Son  of 


DOCTRINE    CONCERNING    HUMAN   NATURE. 


387 


a  jiiPt  Christian  view  [Anschauung,]  also, 
Oiigen  calls  the  Holy  Ghost — as  the 
source  of  the  Divine  life  communicated 
to  the  Christian,  which,  penetrating  and 
sanctifying  the  natures  of  men,  although 
according  to  its  nature  it  be  One,  still  re- 
veals itself  in  manifold  ways  in  the  mani- 
fold qualities  of  human  nature,  and  shows 
itself  efficient  in  acting  upon  them — "  the 
substance  of  all  gifts  and  graces  effected 
by  God,  and  communicated  through 
Christ,  as  something  substantial  in  the 
Holy  Ghost."  According  to  his  system 
of  subordination,  which  is  of  importance 
for  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  Greek  Church  in  the  following  period 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  in  his  view,  the  first 
Being  [or  nature,  Wesen,]  produced  by 
God  the  Father,  through  the  Son.  In  this 
respect  also  the  Unity  system  was  already 
brought  more  prominently  forward  in  the 
Western  Church  during  the  last  years  of 
this  period,  especially  in  the  letter  of 
Diony*:ius  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  his 
namesake  of  Alexandria.     (See  above.) 

From  the  'Doctrines  relating  to  God' 
(Theology  in  the  more  confined  sense  of 
the  word)  we  pass  to  the  Doctrines  which 
relate  to  the  nature  of  man  (Anthropo- 
logy;) two  classes  of  doctrines  which 
stand  together  in  close  connection,  when 
conceived  after  that  mode  of  viewing  them 
which  belongs  exclusively  to  Christianity, 
just  as  both  of  them  receive  their  pro- 
perly Christian  character  and  significance, 
by  their  peculiar  relation  to  the  Doctrine 
of  Redemption,  the  centre  point  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

The  Doctrine  of  Redemption,  while  it 
is  indissolubly  connected  with  one  mode 
of  viewing  human  nature,  is  essentially 
contradictory  to  other  modes.  It  neces- 
sarily presupposes  the  recognition  of  tiie 
truth,  that  human  nature  stands  in  need 
of  redemption,  and  hence,  that  there  exists 
a  schism  and  discord  in  it,  and  an  es- 
trangement of  it  from  God,  through  com- 
munion with  whom  alone  it  can  be  ren- 
dered blessed.  It  stands  in  contradiction 
to  the  stoic  view  of  the  moral  self-suffi- 
ciency of  man,  as  well  as  to  lliat  heathen 
view  of  nature,  which  removed  the  oppo- 
sition between  sin  and  the  holiness  of  God, 
and  deduced  evil  from  the  natural  organi- 
zation of  man,  or  from  the  influence  of  a 
blind  destiny.    Christianity,  therefore,  ne- 


God,  anil  all  the  host  of  the  other  arfiels  which 
follow  Him,  as  especially  the  Holy  Ghost;"  ns 
this!  lust  is  rankcil  among  antjcls,  although  consi- 
dered to  be  elevated  above  all  others. 


cessarily  introduced  with  itself  a  new 
point  of  view  for  the  consideration  of 
human  nature,  and  this  point  of  view  was 
to  be  maintained  against  those  conceptions 
of  it  previously  in  existence.  Christianity 
directed  the  attention  of  the  thoughtful 
to  the  struggle  [Zwiespalt,  division]  be- 
tween good  and  evil  in  human  nature, 
from  which  that  nature  must  be  set  free, 
and  to  such  inquiries  as  the  following : 
'•  Whence  this  struggle  arose  ?  whence 
did  evil  originally  come  ?  and  how  is  it  to 
be  considered  in  respect  to  the  holiness 
of  the  Creator  ?"  And  in  the  case  of  manjj 
men  (see  the  Gnostics  as  described  above,) 
even  before  this  time  speculation  had 
taken  the  turn  to  those  inquiries,  in  con- 
sequence of.  the  desire  that  had  been 
awakened  for  some  solution  of  the  enig- 
mas of  the  course  of  nature  ;  and  in  con- 
sequence of  the  perception  of  the  dis- 
harmony that  exists,  and  the  feeling  of 
commiseration  for  man's  misery,  that  had 
already  been  excited. 

Christianity  united  Anthropology  with 
the  Doctrines  that  relate  to  the  nature  of 
Spirits  (Pneumatology.)  inasmuch  as  it 
ascribed  to  man  the  same  reasonable  and 
moral  nature,  and  the  same  destination,  as 
to  all  the  spirits  of  a  high  order;  it  re- 
presented man,  on  the  one  hand,  as  the 
companion  of  a  race  of  holy  and  blessed 
Spirits  in  a  world  to  which  he  belongs, 
even  while  here  below,  in  virtue  of  his 
inward  life ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  it 
threw  back  the  origin  of  moral  evil  on 
this  very  world  of  Spirits,  by  the  doctrine 
of  a  fallen  Spirit  of  a  higher  order,  from 
whom  at  first  the  origin  of  sin  proceeded. 
This  latter  representation  was  of  practical 
import£ince,  in  estjiblisliing  the  doctrinal 
view  of  sin,  inasmuch  as  by  means  of  it, 
a  more  express  and  direct  contrast  might 
be  presented  against  the  important  error 
of  the  moral  judgment,  which  deduced 
evil  from  the  mere  nature  of  the  senses, 
and  from  the  natural  organization  of  man. 

The  Gnostics,  however,  did  not  merely 
neglect  the  practical  and  Christian  view 
in  their  union  between  Anthropologv  and 
Pneumatology,  Iiut  tlioy  rather  lost  sight 
of  it  entirely  in  tlieir  idle  speculations. 
We  observed  before  (see  above,)  how 
their  theories,  intended  to  reconcile  the 
holiness  of  God  with  tiie  actual  presence 
of  evil,  necessarily  disparaged  alike  the 
holiness  and  the  omnipotence  of  God.  and 
tended  altogether  to  remove  (he  notion  of 
evil,  which  they  traced  finally  up  to  a 
necessity  arising  from  the  nature  of 
things.    The  Christian  doctrine  of  Satan's 


388 


NORTH    AFRICAN   AND    ALEXANDRIAN    VIEWS    CONTRASTED. 


influence,  &c.,  lost  with  them  its  whole 
characteristic  importance;  because  in  their 
estimation,  Satan  was  nothing  more  than 
a  mere  natural  power,  tlie  culminating 
point  of  the  power  of  the  'Y^»j,  which  re- 
sisted every  Divine  influence. 

In  contradiction  to  the  Gnostics,  the 
Church-teachers  were  especially  con- 
cerned to  show,  that  evil  was  no  neces- 
sary result  of  the  composition  of  nature, 
but  had  its  origin  in  the  freewill  of 
beings,  created  by  God  for  good,  and  also 
that  there  were  no  natures  either  essen- 
tianly  wicked  in  consequence  of  their  de- 
rivation from  one  source,  or  essentially 
good  in  consequence  of  their  derivation 
from  another;  but  that  in  consequence  of 
their  derivation,  equal  moral  capabilities 
■were  present  in  all,  and  the  use  or  neglect 
of  them  was  wholly  dependent  on  the 
freewill  of  the  individual.  There  was  no 
need,  in  arguing  against  the  Gnostics,  to 
prove,  in  the  first  instance,  that  human 
jiature  had  been  defiled  by  some  element 
foreign  to  it;  but  on  the  contrary,  the 
first  point  to  make  good  against  them 
was,  that  this  foreign  admixtuie  could  not 
have  utterly  destroyed  man's  freewill. 
Upon  the  whole,  the  Church-teachers 
agreed  unanimously  in  maintaining  both 
tlie  freewill  of  man,  as  a  necessary  con- 
dition for  the  existence  of  any  morality, 
without  which  there  could  be  no  right- 
eous judgment  on  the  part  of  God  and 
also  in  maintaining,  at  the  same  time,  the 
necessity  of  Divine  grace  for  the  moral 
reformation  of  human  nature.  The  accu- 
rate investigation  of  the  mutual  relation 
between  these  two  things,  was  yet  far 
from  this  period;  but  still,  amiclst  this 
agreement  in  essentials,  two  tendencies  in 
the  development  of  the  doctrines  per- 
taining to  these  points,  which  recede  from 
each  other,  are  nevertheless,  to  be  found, 
when  we  compare  the  doctrines  of  the 
Nortli  African  and  the  Alexandrian  teach- 
ers with  each  other. 

The  formation  of  the  North  African 
system  of  Church  doctrine  proceeded 
from  TertuUian.  He  received  from  the 
then  existing  Church  doctrines  the  idea, 
that  the  first  man,  as  he  was  created  by 
God,  had  every  capability  of  manifesting 
the  image  of  God  through  his  spiritual 
and  moral  nature ;  but  that  these  capa- 
bilities were  still  undeveloped.  Their 
development  depended  on  the  freewill  of 
man.  The  nature  of  man  was  pure 
enough  that  no  obstruction  was  ofl'ered  to 
the  influence  of  God  upon  it ;  through 
communion    with    God    human    nature 


]  would  have  been  constantly  more  and 
more  ennobled  and  refined,  and  would 
have  been  enabled  to  attain  to  a  partici- 
pation in  a  divine  and  imperishable  life, 
so  that  it  would  have  been  forever  re- 
moved out  of  the  dominions  of  death. 
But,  by'means  of  the  first  sin,  which  con- 
sisted in  man's  not  subjecting  his  will  to 
the  will  of  God,  but  opposing  it,*  man 
stepped  out  of  this  communion  with  God, 
and  thus  became  subjected  to  the  mastery 
of  sinfulness  and  perishableness."f  As 
the  harmony  between  the  Divine  and  the 
human  will  entailed  as  its  consequence  a 
harmony  between  all  the  parts  of  human 
nature ;  so  the  rent  between  the  Divine 
and  the  human  will  introduced  a  rent  in 
the  li'hoh  nature  of  man.  Connection 
with  an  ungodly  Spirit  took  the  place  of 
connection  with  the  Spirit  of  God.  The 
Father  of  the  race  of  men  communicated 
tlie  Spirit  of  this  world  [Ufa-ally,  the 
world-spirit,]  to  all  his  descendants.^ 

But  Tertullian's  theory  about  th&  mode 
of  propagating  this  first  element  of  de- 
struction to  the  nature  of  man,  was  pecu- 
liar to  himself,  and  connected  with  his 
theory,  of  the  propagation  of  souls.  In 
fact,  he  thought  that  original  forefather  of 
the  race  bore  within  himself  the  unde- 
veloped seed  of  all  mankind  ;  that  the 
soul  of  the  first  man  was  the  source  of 
all  other  human  souls,  and  that  all  the 
qualities  of  human  nature  were  only 
manifold  modifications  of  that  one  spi- 
ritual substance. §  (This  is  a  point  of 
view,  which,  although  it  was  conceived 
in  sensuous  images  by  TertuUian,  who 
could  not  think  of  any  thing  except 
through  the  medium  of  images  drawn 
from  the  senses,  was  not  necessarily  con- 
nected with  sensuous  views.)  Hence, 
the  whole  nature  of  man  became  cor- 
rupted in  our  first  forefather,  and  sinful- 
ness was  propagated  together  with  the 
souls  of  men. II 

TertuUian  was,  in  like  manner,  imbued 
with  the  conviction  of  the  sinfulness  that 
adhered  to  man's  nature,  and  also  the 
conviction  of  man's  nature  being  unde- 
niably akin  to  God  ;  and  that  it  was  ex- 
pressly in  contrast  to  this  latter  element 
of  his  nature,  that  sin  manifested  itself  as 


*  Electio  suffi  polius  quam  divinse  sententirc. 

■j-  Among  the  Fathers  of  this  period  Ijoth  of 
these  notions  were  included  in  the  idea  of  <fifl:§a  : 
just  the  opposite  term  a<|>9«?(ri«  with  them  signi- 
fied divine,  imperishable,  and  holy  life. 

■^  Spiritum  mundi  universo  generi  suo  tradidit. 

§  l)e  anima,  c.  10,  and  c.  19. 

II  Tradux  animse,  tradux  peccati. 


tertullian's  anthropology. 


3S9 


sin.  "  Tlie  corruption  of  man's  nature," 
he  says,*  "  is  a  second  nature,  whicli  has 
its  own  God  and  Father;  namely,  the 
author  of  this  corruption  himself;  but 
still  in  such  a  way  that  good  is  also  pre- 
sent in  the  soul,  that  original  Divine  and 
genuine  [Good]  which  is  properly  natural 
to  it.  For  that  which  is  from  God  is  not 
so  much  extinguished  as  dimmed.  For 
it  may  be  dimmed,  because  it  is  not  God, 
but  it  cannot  be  extinguished,  because  it 
is  from  God.  Wherefore,  as  Light,  which 
is  obstructed,  nevertheless  remains,  but 
does  not  appear,  if  the  obstruction  is  suf- 
liciently  dense,  so  also  the  good  which  is 
in  the  soul,  being  oppressed  by  the  evil, 
in  conformity  to  its  own  peculiar  nalure,t 
either  remains  entirely  inactive,  while  its 
Light  remains  hidden,  or  when  it  finds  its 
freedom,  shines  out  where  an  opportu- 
nity is  given.  Thus  some  are  very  good 
and  some  are  very  wicked,  and  j'ct  all 
souls  are  one  race ;  and  also  in  the  very 
worst  there  is  something  of  good,  and  in 
the  very  best  something  of  wickedness,  for 
God  alone  is  without  sin,  and  Christ  is  the 
only  man  wholly  sinless,  for  Christ  is 
also  God.  The  Divine  nature  of  the 
soul  breaks  forth  into  anticipations  in 
consequence  of  its  original  goodness,  and 
its  God-consciousness  delivers  a  testimony. 
.  .  .  .  Therefore,  no  soul  is  Avithout  guilt, 
because  none  is  without  the  seed  of  good." 
He  considered  every  part  and  power  of 
man's  nature  as  the  work  of  God,  as 
something  intrinsically  good;  and  hence, 
all  tliat  is  contrary  to  reason  in  it,  only 
as  the  consequence  of  that  first  rent  pro- 
duced in  man  by  transgression  ;  and  he  ac- 
knowledged the  justice  of  Plato's  division 
of  the  soul  into  the  Xoyjxov  and  uXoyon, 
not  in  reference  to  the  original  nature  of 
man  ;  but  only  in  regard  to  it  in  a  state  of 
corruption.:]: 


•  De  Anima,  c.  41. 

•j-  [Ita  boniim  in  anima  a  malo  oppressnm,  pro 
quulitnte  ejus,  aut  in  totum  vacat,  occultala  luce, 
aut  qua  datur  radial,  inventa  lil>ertate. 

So  auch  ist  das  von  dem  Bosen,  wie  dfssen 
e/i^en(humliches  We.se?}  mlt  sich  bringf,  unter- 
driicktcGute  in  der  Secic  ganz  wirkungslos,  &c. 

It  would  seem,  although  it  is  rather  ambiguous, 
from  this,  that  Neander  refers  pro  qualilafe  ejus 
to  the  nature  of  evil,  as  opposed  to  good,  and  op- 
pressing it  where  it  can ;  but  (if  Kigali's  reading  is 
correct,)  it  seems  to  nie  to  belong  to  ii;iH)d,  which 
being  like  light  in  its  nature,  sulFers  either  partial 
or  entire  obscuration.] 

%  Ue  Anima,  16.  Naturale  enim  rationale 
crcdeiidum  est,  quod  aniinaj  a  primordio  sit  in- 
gcnitum  a  ntlioni/li  videlicet  auctore  ;  irrationale 
autem  poslcrius  intcUigendum,  ipsum  iilud  trans- 


With  regard  to  liie  Gnostic  doctrme  of 
essential  dilFerence  in  the  natures  of  men, 
in  consequence  of  which  they  maintained 
that  no  Pneinnaticus  [or  Spiritual  man] 
could  be  formed  from  a  llylicus  or 
Choicus  [a  man  of  a  low,  material  or 
earthly  nature]  or  vice  versa — Terlullian 
contrasted  with  this  doctrine  the  omnipo- 
tence of  grace,  and  the  changeableness  of 
the  hinnan  will.  When  the  Gnostics  ap- 
pealed to  the  declaration  of  Ciirist,  tiiat 
no  good  tree  brings  forth  evil  fruit,  and 
no  evil  tree  good  fruit,  Tertullian  an- 
swered them  thus,*  "  If  this  be  so,  then 
God  cannot  raise  up  children  to  Abraham 
out  of  stones,  nor  could  the  generations 
of  vipers  bring  forth  fruits  of  repentance, 
and  the  apostle  was  in  error  when  he 
wrote  as  follows:  '  Jlnd  we  loo  once  were 
darkness^  and  we  also  once  were  Ike  chil- 
dren of  wrath,  among  whom  yc  were  once 
also,  but  ye  are  washed.^  Ikit  can  the 
declarations  of  the  Holy  S()irit  stand  in 
contradiction  to  each  other }  No !  for 
the  evil  tree  will  never  bring  fortli  good 
fruit,  tmlil  it  he  grafed,  and  the  good  tree 
will  produce  evil  fruit,  if  it  be  not  culti- 
vated ;  and  the  stones  will  become  the 
•children  of  Abraham,  when  tliey  are 
Aishioned  into  the  faith  of  Abraham,  and 
the  generation  of  vipers  will  bring  forth 
the  fruits  of  repentance,  when  they  have 
vomited  out  the  poison  of  wickedness. 
This,  the  grace  of  God  may  eiU^ct,  which 
is  certainly  more  powerful  than  nature, 
and  to  which  the  freewill  of  man  is  sub- 
ordinate in  us But  as  this  will  is 

also  a  part  of  our  nature,  and  changeable, 
withersoever  it  turns,  thither  our  nature 
leads  us  also."  This  remarkable  passage 
may  be  taken  by  some,  as  if  Tertullian 
ascribed  to  grace  an  irresistible  and  at- 
tractive power  in  reference  to  the  cor- 
rupted will  of  man  ;  and  it  might  be  said, 
that  he  maintained  the  freewill  of  man 
only  in  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  a 
necessity  of  fate,  and  against  the  opinion 
of  an  entire  moral  incapacity  in  ceriain 
natures  :  but  that  he  did  not  maintain  it 
in  reference  to  the  nature-reforming  prin- 
ciple of  grace.  Montanism  might  easdy 
lead  to  this  result,  that  the  overpowering 
influence  of  die  Divine  nature  should  be 
exairgerated,  and  the  freewill  of  man 
made  onlv  a  blind  passive  instrument. 
But  still  tliis  view  would  be  by  no  means 


gressionis  admissum  atque  (quod)  exinde  inolfl- 
verit  in  anima,  ad  insLir  j.un  naturuliUtis,  quia 
statim  in  nnturic  primordio  acccdit. 
•  De  Anima,  c  21. 

2k2 


390 


ORIGEN'S    VIEWS. 


supported  by  the  context,  according  to 
which  Tertullian  only  wishes  to  make 
out,  that  grace  by  its  Divine  influence  on 
our  corrupted  nature,  in  virtue  of  its  free- 
will can  communicate  to  it  a  higher  power 
than  that  which  resides  in  itself;  and  we 
are  bound  to  take  that  explanation,  which 
best  accords  with  the  rest  of  Teriullian's 
declaration  about  freewill.  And  even 
supposing  that  Montanism  necessarily 
exalts  especially  the  doctrine  of  Divine 
grace,  yet  the  doctrine  of  an  irresistible 
grace  is  any  thing  but  established  by  it, 
[Montanism,]  for  the  very  circumstance 
that  Montanism  attributes  such  an  influ- 
ence to  the  case  of  prophets  only,  proves 
that  it  does  not  maintain  it  in  ordinary 
cases. 

The  other  disposition  we  find  in  the 
Alexandrian  Church.  Clement,  without 
intending  it,  opposed  the  North  African 
Church  doctrine,  while  he  had  in  view 
only  the  Gnostic  doctrine,  that  birth  is  a 
work  of  the  evil  Spirit.  ''  As  children 
may  have  sinned,  and  fallen  under  the 
curse  of  Adam,  while  as  yet  they  have 
never  done  any  action  of  their  own."* 
Clement  was  particularly  anxious  to 
maintain  this  point ;  that  all  the  Divine 
operations  of  grace  went  on  the  condition 
of  the  independence  [lit.  self-determina- 
tion, self-choice]  of  the  freewill,  as  the 
ground  of  all  moral  development.  No 
doubt  he  went  too  far,  (as  any  man  is 
likely  to  do,  who  always  follows  a  single 
point  of  view,)  in  endeavouring  to  define 
too  accurately  the  limits  which  separate 
[in  these  operations  of  grace]  the  Divine 
from  the  human;  but  at  the  same  time  he 
did  it  only  out  of  a  wish  to  maintain  the 
practical  importance  of  the  moral  inde- 
pendence of  man  ;  though  it  is  still  quite 
certain  that  he  was  far  from  ascribing  to 
the  will  of  man,  a  self-sufliciency  that 
was  independent  of  the  reforming  power 
of  Divine  grace,  hi  one  passage  he  ex- 
presses himself  thus,  with  respect  to  the 
mutual  relation  of  these  two  :|  "When 
man  seeks  to  free  himself  from  passions 
by  his  own  discipline  and  his  own  en- 
deavours he  does  not  succeed.  But  if  he 
shows  a  right  earnest  desire  and  endea- 
vour after  this  end,  he  will  attain  ii  by  the 
assistance  of  God's  power,  for  God  com- 
municates his  Spirit  to  those  so\ils  that 
desire  it.  But  if  they  relax  from  their 
desire,  then  also  tlie  Spirit  of  God  which 


*  III.  f.  4.53,  469.  [p.  .541,  556-7.  Ed.  Pott.  p. 
191.  201.  K(1.  Sylb.] 
j  Quis  dives  salvetur?  c.  21. 


'  had  been  bestowed  upon  them,  withdraws 

I  itself For  the  kingdom    of  God 

j  does  not  belong  to  those  who  sleep  and 
are  lazy,  but  the  '  impetuous  seize  upon 
I  it.' " 

j  The  system  of  Origen  in  respect  to 
this  matter  is  altogether  peculiar  to  him- 
self. We  observed  above,  that  he  was 
attached  to  an  Emanation-scheme,  spirit- 
ually conceived ;  but  while  the  Gnostics 
tried  to  explain  the  diflerence  between 
reasonable  creatures,  partly  by  a  natural 
law  deduced  from  the  gradual  development 
of  life  from  God,  and  partly  by  their  de- 
scent from  two  fundamentally  different 
principles,  Origen,  on  the  contrary,  en- 
deavoured to  deduce  all  differences  from 
moral  freedom.  "  God,"  he  maintained, 
"  as  the  absolute  unity  can  be  the  source 
of  nothing  but  unity ;  inasmuch  as  all 
being  is  derived  from  him,  the  unity  of 
its  nature  must  be  shown  therein.  From 
him  no  diflerence  and  no  variety  [lit. 
multifariousness]  can  arise,  and  it  would 
be  contrary  to  his  love  and  his  justice, 
not  to  bestow  on  all  his  creatures  the 
same  measure  of  perfection  and  blessed- 
ness. Thus  God  is  to  be  conceived 
originally  as  the  first  source  of  a  spiritual 
world,  allied  to  him,  and  rendered  blessed 
by  communion  with  him,  and  the  mem- 
bers of  this  world  were  all  similar  to 
each  other.  In  the  second  book  of  his 
work  w£^i  a.^x'^ii,  he  expresses  himself  as 
if  he  not  only  considered  all  differences 
in  the  measure  of  powers  and  of  blessed- 
ness, but  also  generally  all  differences  of 
proper  and  peculiar  being,  no  original 
difference,  but  as  something  which  had 
proceeded  in  the  first  instance  from  a  dif- 
ference in  the  moral  direction  of  the  will. 
According  to  this,  Origen  will  have  con- 
sidered the  original  creation  to  have  been 
only  one  that  consisted  of  beings  alto- 
gether alike,  but  only  numerically  dis- 
tinct, and  all  peculiarity  to  have  been  the 
consequence  of  alienation  from  God. 
This  was,  to  say  the  truth,  a  very  limited 
representation  of  the  creation,  in  relation 
to  the  infinite  Being  of  God  ;  but  in  con- 
trast to  Gnosticism  and  to  the  Platonism 
by  which  Origen  is  usually  directed,  the 
predominance  of  the  Christian  point  of 
view  in  his  mind  (although  tliis  was  con- 
ceived by  him  in  a  one-sided  way)  is 
here  shown  in  a  characteristic  manner, 
because  he  opposes  the  moral  view  as  the 
highest,  and  as  that  which  shall  deter- 
mine every  thing,  to  the  scheme  of  a  na- 
tural necessity  or  fate. 

It  may,  at  the  same  time,  be  the  case 


ORIGIN   OF    EVIL. 


that  Origen  in  later  days  retracted  this 
notion,  as  he  did  many  other  crude  ideas, 
wliich  he  had  brought  forward  in  that 
work  of  speculative  doctrine.  He  says, 
neverdieless,  in  a  passage  of  later  dale,* 
that  the  Son  of  God  is  the  general  reflec- 
tion of  the  glory  of  God,  but  that  in  part, 
tlie  beams  of  tliis  general  reflection  spread 
themselves  over  the  rest  of  tlie  reasonable 
creation  ;  for  no  created  being  can  contain 
the  wiiole  of  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  in- 
ference to  which  this  would  seem  to  lead 
is,  that  what  is  One  in  the  Logos,  in  the 
rest  of  the  spiritual  world  developes  itself 
into  a  variety  of  individual  properties,  of 
which  every  one  reflects  and  represents 
the  glory  of  God  in  some  mode  peculiar 
to  itself,  and  thus  the  collected  totality  of 
these  individualities,  which  mutually  sup- 
ply the  deficiency  of  each  other,  would 
correspond  to  the  collected  revelation  of 
the  glory  of  God  in  the  Logos.  That 
would  certainly  be  a  just  conclusion,  if 
Origen  had  unravelled  to  himself  with  a 
clear  consciousness  the  full  meaning  of 
the  thought,  which  he  expressed  ;  but 
one  is  led  to  inquire  whether  this  was 
the  case.  He  appears,  in  a  passage  of  the 
same  Commentary  of  St.  John,  from  which 
the  first  passage  was  quoted,  to  determine 
it  as  the  final  aim  of  all  this  development, 
that  all  reasonable  beings,  in  attaining  to 
God  through  tlie  Logos,  miglit  have  only 
one  employment,  [Thiitigkeit,  activity] 
namely,  the  employment  of  the  contem- 
plation [Anschauung,  perception  or  intui- 
tion] of  God ;  and  that  being  fashioned 
through  the  knowledge  of  the  Father, 
might  thus  become  perfectly,  that  which 
the  Son  is,  as  now  none  but  tlie  Son  hath 
known  the  Father.f  As  now  according 
to  this  last  doctrine  of  Origen,  by  means 
of  this  last  completion,;];  every  thing  will 
return  again  to  its  original  condition,  it 
appears  also  to  follow  as  a  consequence 
tliat  according  to  this  same  doctrine  such 
an  equality  and  unity  also  originally 
existed. 

Origen  still  farther  concluded  that  God 
alone  is  good  by  his  very  nature  ;  but  on 
tlie  contrary,  that  all  created  beings  are, 
and  remain  good,  only  by  means  of  their 


391 


communion  with  the  original  source  of 
all  good,  the  Logos.  As  soon  as  ever 
the  desire  exists  in  any  being  gifted  with 
reason,  of  being  any  thing  for  itself,  tliere 
evil  is  sure  to  exist.  "  The  good,  which 
has  become  so,"  says  Origen,*  "  cannot 
be  like  that  which  is  good  by  its  nature; 
this,  however,  will  never  be  wanting  to 
him,  who  receives  in  himself  for  his  own 
preservation  the  bread  of  life,  as  it  is 
called.  But  wherever  it  is  wanting  to 
any  one,  it  arises  from  his  own  fault ;  be- 
cause he  has  neglected  partaking  of  the 
living  bread  and  the  true  drink,  by  which 
his  wings  being  nourished  and  moistened 
will  grow."j  Evil  is  the  only  thing 
which  has  the  foundation  of  its  being  in 
itself  and  not  in  God,  and  which  is,  there- 
fore, founded  in  no  being,  but  is  nothing 
else  than  an  estrangement  from  the  true 
Being,  and  has  only  a  subjective  and  no 
objective  existence  at  all,  and  is  in  itself 
nothing.^  Therefore,  he  says:  "The 
proposition  of  the  Gnostic,  that  Satan  is 
no  creature  of  God,§  has  some  truth  for 
its  foundation,  namely  this,  that  Satan  in 
respect  to  his  nature  is  a  creature  of  God, 
but  not  as  Satan."|| 

When  the  will  of  the  Spirits,  who  were 
blessed  in  a  Divine  life,  estranged  itself 
from  God,  the  original  unity  became  dis- 
solved, there  arose  a  disharmony,  which 
needed  now  again  to  be  brought  to  unity 
by  means  of  a  process  of  purification  and 
improvement.  The  soul  of  the  world  is 
nothing  else  than  the  power  and  wisdom 
of  God,  who   knows    how  to   bind   up 


•  T.  xxxii.  Joh.  c.  18. 

j-  T.  i.  Joh.  c.  16.  Also  the  passage  in  Matt. 
^07,  "Then  will  the  righteous  no  longer  shine 
after  a  cliflbrent  manner,  as  in  the  beginning,  but 
all  will  shine  as  one  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their 
Father."  Matt.  xiii.  43.  But  still  this  passage  of 
Origen  may  be  understood  to  ap|)Iy  only  to  an 
equality  of  moral  condition  and  blessedness. 

\   The    O^.K-JLTdLrTAJK. 


*  c.  Cels.  vi.  44.  [p.  305  Ed.  ypenccr.  The 
two  expressions  are,  to  ilriaJan  u-yitdcy,  and  iij,»Si» 
TO  KiTA  rj/n0i0;<K'j(:  ajaSif  xa/  i^  i7riy(vvii/uii.Ti( 
..^a6cv.  The  "this,"  in  the  text  refers  to  this  last; 
the  adventitious  good. — H.  J.  R.] 

\  An  allusion  to  the  I'latonic  myth  of  the 
wings  of  the  soul  in  the  Phajdrus.  [We  must 
observe  that  Origen  himself  continues  the  sen- 
tence by  alluding  to  the  wings  of  the  eagle  men- 
tioned by  Solomon,  Prov.  xxiii.  .5,  which  Origeii 
rather  alters.  But  see  Plat.  Phad.  §  56.~H. 
J.  R.] 

^  Origen  gave  a  more  ethical  meaning  to  the 
metaphysical  Platonic  idea  of  the  jux  :»  (according 
I  to  which  [namely,  the  Platonic  notion]  if  we 
make  the  idea  clear  to  our  own  minds,  evil  is  ne- 
cessary as  the  limit  to  the  development  of  life,  and, 
therefore,  the  idea  of  evil  according  to  its  moral 
import  is  really  supersetlcd.)  With  him  [i.  c. 
Origen,]  the  jun  cv  is  here  rather  a  privative  than  a 
negative.  See  t.  ii.  Joh.  ^  7.  u  jWirt;^  /ti:  t-.u 
ivTi;,  /uiTtX'u^i  it  ol  uyKi,  i^K'^yo!;  uv  ovti;  ;^5x/uaT<- 
^'./»  c«  Jt  ^^■r',<rr^t^>Tt(  Txir  tcu  Irro;  fjt%r(,j(>ii  t* 
ia-TS^MO-So/  Till  ivToc,  yry.ti:un>i  oi/'jc  ^cti:. 

§  Sec  above  in  the  account  of  the  Gnostics. 

i  In  Joh.  t.  ii.  c.  7. 


392 


ORIGEN    AGAINST    CREATIANISM, 


these  great  moral  differences  in  one  living 
whole ;  and  which,  subjecting  all  these 
dissonances  to  a  higher  law,  penetrates 
and  vivifies  the  whole.*  We  see  before 
us  only  a  fragment  of  the  great  course, 
which  the  world  will  run,  which  em- 
braces all  moral  differences  with  all  the 
consequences  that  develope  themselves 
from  them,  until  their  entire  removal ; 
and  hence  our  imperfect  TheocUcea.f 

h  follows  necessarily  from  the  doc- 
trines of  Origen,  that  even  human  souls 
Avere  originally  altogether  of  a  similar 
frame  with  all  higher  Spirits,  and  that  all 
differences  between  the  former  and  the 
latter,  and  between  individuals  of  the 
former,  proceeded  only  from  differences 
of  the  moral  disposition  of  the  will  of 
all  individuals,  and  that,  consequently,  all 
souls  are  fallen  heavenly  beings.  The 
whole  temporal  conscience  moving  itself 
between  opposites,  the  understanding, 
directed  to  what  is  finite,  proceeded  only 
out  of  estrangement  from  that  unity  of 
the  Divine  life,  the  life  of  immediate 
intuition,  and  it  is  the  destiny  of  the  soul 
that  it  should,  being  purified,  again  raise 
itself  up  to  that  life,  in  the  pure  imme- 
diate intuition  of  God;  or,  that,  just  as 
through  the  cooling  of  that  heavenly 
fire,  the  life  of  spirit  degenerated  into 
the  life  of  the  soul,  so  also  the  soul 
should  again  be  elevated  to  the  rank  of 
spirit.  J 

Origen  set  this  theory  of  the  pre- 
existence  of  souls  in  opposition  to  Cre- 
atianism,  which  supposed  individual  souls 
to  arise  from  the  immediate  act  of  creation 
on  the  part  of  God;  for  this  theory  ap- 
peared to  him  irreconcileable  with  the 
love  and  justice  of  God,  which  maintains 
itself  equally  towards  all  his  creatures ; 
and  also  in  opposition  to  the  Traducian- 
ism  of  Tertullian,  for  this  theory  appeared 
to  him  too  sensuous.  Thus,  as  he  in 
order  to  be  able  to  maintain  his  theory  of 
a  creation  wliich  preceded  this  temporal 
world,  without  prejudice  to  the  Church 
doctrine,  appealed  to  the  circumstance  that 
the  Church  doctrine  defined  nothing  con- 
cerning this  point ;  so  alsp  did  he  appeal 


f  Honiil.  iv.  in  Jer.  §  1.  [Theodicea  is,  per- 
haps, a  new  word  in  English,  althouf;!i  known  as 
the  name  of  tlie  essay  of  Leibnitz. — H.  .1.  I?.] 

^   Tlae*.  Tyiv  aTnTrraiTiv  km  tuv  -^u^iv  rxv  uts  tsu 

liib.  ii.  c.  8.  m^i  "g;^^!.  Compare  the  similar  view 
entertained  by  the  Gnostics,  for  which  see  page 
238. 


to  the  same  circumstance,  in  regard  to 
his  own  peculiar  speculative  theory  of 
the  origin  of  souls. 

In  tlie  doctrine,  however,  of  a  corrup- 
tion and  guilt  that  cleaved  to  human  na- 
ture from  the  beginning,  he  might,  exactly 
as  the  North  African  Church-teachers 
expressed  themselves, — he  might  speak 
of  a  mystery  of  a  birth,*  according  to 
which  every  one  who  comes  into  the 
world  needs  purification,  and  he  might 
quote  in  favour  of  this  view  the  passages 
of  the  Bible,  which  were  quoted  by  others 
in  favour  of  the  doctrine  of  original  sin 
[Erbsunde — inherited  iniquity — original, 
or  birth-sin.]  But  he  felt  himself  obliged 
to  deduce  this  condition  of  human  nature 
from  another  source ;  namely,  from  the 
proper  guilt  of  every  individual  fallen 
heavenly  Spirit,  contracted  in  a  former 
state  of  existence  :  and  hence,  according 
to  the  theory  of  Origen,  this  corruption 
could  not  be  alike  in  all,  but  its  degree 
would  depend  on  the  degree  of  the  for- 
mer guiltiness.  Although  he  accounted 
Adam  as  a  historical  person,  yet  he  could 
be  nothing  else  in  his  view,  than  the  first 
incarnate  soul  that  srmk  down  from  the 
heavenly  state  of  existence  :  he  must  Iiave 
looked  upon  the  history  of  paradise,  like 
the  Gnostics,  as  being  symbolical,  so  that 
it  [paradise]  was  to  him  the  symbol  of  a 
higher  spiritujil  world,  and  Adam  was  to 
him  at  the  same  time,  the  type  [image  or 
form]  of  all  mankind,  of  all  fallen  souls.f 

Origen  in  his  v/ork  tte^i  ccp-^qiiv^  agreeing 
also  here  with  the  Platonisls,  and  many 
Gnostics,  had  considered]]  tlie  doctrine, 
that  the  fallen  souls  might,  through  entire 
decomposition,  sink  into  the  bodies  of 
animals,  as  at  least  something  which  was 
not  to  be  exactly  rejected.  But  as  his 
system  was  essentially  distinguished  from 
the  Neoplatonic  by  the  predominance  of 
the  Christian,  morally-teleological  point 
of  view  ;  so  this  point  of  view,  always 
becoming  more  and  more  fully  formed, 
necessarily  would  lead  to  the  following 
result;  namely,  at  last  entirely  to  throw 
away§  the  doctrine  of  such  an  incorpora- 


•j-  c.  Cels.  1.  iv.  §  40,  o'jx  oCtui;  tti^i  h:;  rmr,  Zn 
TTiet  cKcu  Tou  yfv-.uc  rcujr:t  <^i.7H.:vToi:  rm  &i'.(.u  Kt,-^c.-j,  It 
is  not  inconsistent  with  this,  that  Origen  should 
speak  of  Adam,  quite  in  accordance  loilh  th^ 
Church  view,  as  in  t.  i.  Joh.  ^  22.  t.  xiii.  §  34  ; 
he  might  place  his  own  sen.se  upon  this ;  espe- 
cially in  Homilies,  where  Gnosis  was  out  of  place. 
H.  14.  in  Jcrem. 

\  Sec  the  Greek  Fragment,  tt.  uf^X'^v,  lib.  i.  Ori- 
gen. Ed.  de  la  Rue,  t.  i.  p.  76. 

4  See  c.  Cels.  iii.  c.  75;    ii.  IG,  in  Jcrem. 


Zafxixoj ^vp(^iKoi — vntv/jteiTiKot. 


393 


tion  of  souls,  as  inconsistent  with  tlie  |  llie  more  refined  egotists,  the  mcn-of- 
final  purpose  of  the  purification,  which  understanding,*  among  whom  a  more  re- 
presupposes  a  continuity  of  conscious-  fined  selfisliness  prevails,  which  docs  not 
ness.  According  to  the  same  point  of  j  manifest  itself  in  open  outbreaks  of  sinful 
view,  he  opposed  his  theory  of  the  pro-  ,  conduct  and  passions ;  who  are,  as  he 
cess  of  purification  of  souls,  which  was    expresses  himself,  neither  hot  nor  cold 


to  continue  to  the  last  limit  of  the  resto- 
ration, to  the  doctrine  of  a  cycle  in  the 
•wanderings  of  the  soul. 

Origen,    like   the    Gnostics,   supposed 
three  principles*  in  human   nature   in  its 


and  he  throws  out  tlie  inquiry,  whether 
the  o-a^Knto?  cannot  attaint  more  easily 
than  the '{'i;;)^i(£&f  to  a  consciousness  of  the 
misery  of  sin,  and  lirncc  to  a  true  con- 
version ;    an    incpiiry     whicii     may     be 


fallen  state,  tlie  cra^y.iy.ov,  the  ■¥vp(^ty.cii^  and  j  changed  into  that  odier,  whether  the  pub 


the  7rvivfA.ce.TiKoii,  and  also  three  different 
conditions  of  human  nature,  correspond- 
ing to  these  principles.  But  he  separated 
himself  from  them  in  an  essential  point  •, 
namely,  that  as  he  recognised  all  human 
souls  as  similar,  he  accordingly  supposed 
the  same  principles  in  every  one  of  them, 
and  that  he,  tlierefore,  considered  their 
different  conditions  to  proceed,  not  from 


licans  often  miglit  not  be  more  easily 
converted  than  the  Pharisees.  Willi  this 
is  connected  the  idea  of  Origen,  that,  just 
as  a  skilful  physician  sometimes  calls 
forth  the  sources  of  disease,  which  are 
lying  hid  in  the  body,  and  produces  an 
artificial  evil,  in  order  that  this  source  of 
disease  which  threatens  to  destroy  the 
whole  fabric  may  bv  this  means  be  driven 


an  original  dilference  of  nature  in  them,  forth  out  of  the  body;  so  also  God  places 
but  from  the  predominance  of  one  or  other  I  men  in  sncli  a  condition,  that  the  evil 
of  those  [three]  principles  in  them,  de- 1  hidden  within  them  is  called  forth  into 
pendent  on  the  different  directions  of  their  ;  open  activity,  in  order  that  they  may 
will.    The  -TTuvixoc  is  that  portion  of  man''s  |  tliereby  be  led  to  a  consciousness  of  their 

moral    guilt  and    its    destructive    conse- 
quences ;    and   then  may  be  able   to  be 


nature  properly  called  the  Divine,  the 
power  of  the  higher  inward  intuition  of 
that  which  is  Divine,  which  originally 
formed  the  essential  nature  of  the  Spirit, 
and  is  synonymous  with  »ot? ;  this  -n-vivfAu 
can  have  no  connection  with  evil,  and 
nothing  evil  can  proceed  from  it.t  But 
by  the  predominance  of  sensuousness, 
and  of  the  lower  powers  of  the  soul, 
which  conduce  to  selfishness,  the  activity 
of  this  ir>tvijt.a  becomes  depressed.  Those, 


healed  more  easily  and  more  completely.;]; 
And  in  tliis  way  he  explained  tiie  Scrip- 
tural phrase  "  God  hardened  the  heart," 
and  others  similar  to  it. 

It  is  clear  from  the  remarks  we  have 
made  above  on  tlie  Anthropolosy  of  the 
Church-teachers  of  this  period,  that  the 
need  of  redemption  for  human  nature  was 
generally  recognised  in  their  svstem,  and 


in  whom,   on  the  contrary,  this  higUesitl  ihiis  the  Doctrine  of  the  Redeemer.  \\U'\ch 
principle  of  human  nature  is  the  predomi- i  forms  the  peculiar  essence  of  Christianity 


nant  and  animating  one,  are  the 


c-    found  in  it  [their  system,  or  anthropology] 


».|  lie  by  no  means,  as  follows  im-  a  point  on  which  it  would  naturally  en- 
mediately  from  his  general  ideas  on  the  graft  itself  As  far  as  the  development 
relation  of  human  nature  to  God,  ascribed  ;  of  this  doctrine  is  concerned,  its  essential 

import,  the  idea  of  a  God-man,  was  deeply 
of  human  nature  ;  but  he  considered  implanted  in  the  Christian  conscience; 
the   organ  destined    lo    receive   in    but  the  difiiirent  portions  of  which  it  ron- 


an  independent  self-existence  tothisprin 

cipl 

it   f 

itself  the  operations  of  the  &nc»  wivixu.^  j  sists,  which  belong  to  the  perfect  develop- 

The  Psychici  are,  in  the. view  of  Origen,!  ment  of  the  .full   contents   of  this  idea, 

— — 1  could  not  come  forward  at  once  and  im- 

nediately  with  clearness  in  the  Christian 
It  was  only  through  the 
opposition  called  forth  in  controversy 
that  the  full  impression  of  what  was  com- 
prehended in  this  idea,  could  be  obtained 


where  he  speaks  of  a  Metempsychosis  in  a  jjara 

boUc  sense,  and  guards  himself  carefully  atrainst  \  conscience. 

any  misunderstanding,  which  could  lead  to  taking 

this  literally. 

•  [I  have  used  the  word  " Principle'  through- 
out this  passage,  as  Princ'p  is  the  word  in  the 
original.  Perhaps,  to  an  English  reader  the  word 
"  element"  would  better  convey  the  idea  intended. 
— H.  J.  R.] 

f  T.  xxxii.  Joh.  c.  11.     dn^jBtTcv  Ta>i  .;^ji^:vm 

T'.   TniUfAdU 

er-jLV  'Xt'^y-'*-'^'i^  '"  ^rtiuua.riK'A.     In  .loh.  t.  ii.  c.  15. 
§  Urigen  Comment,  in  Matt.  Ed.  Huet.p.  306. 
50 


•  [ Verstandes-menschen ;  where    Veratand   is 
opposed  to  Vernunft. — H.  J.  R.] 
■j-  lli^i  I  g;^^»i',  1.  iii.  e.  4. 


t  See  de  Ural.  c.  29  ;  and  the  fragment  of  the 
Commentury  on  Exod.  c.  lU,  "7;  in  the  20lh 
!  rhapter  of  the  cu.hk  iKtx,  and  in  the  2d  Part  [Band] 
I  of  de  la  Rue's  Edition,  p.  3. 


394 


with  all  its  rival  show  of  beauty,  was 
worked  up  so  as  to  present  a  contrast 
between  the  hidden  Divine  glory  of 
Christ,  and  the  wretchedness  of  his  out- 
ward form  and  appearance.  Tertuliiau 
says,*  "  This  vvas  the  very  thing  which 
makes  the  rest  about  him  wonderful;  for 
they  said,  'Whence  came  this  man  to 
such  wisdom  and  such  works  ?'     That  is 


in  definite  conceptions  ;  namely,  the  clear 
and  definite  consciousness  of  that,  which 
we  have  to  conceive  in  the  assumption 
of  human  nature  on  the  part  of  the  Divine 
Logos.  Jn  the  development  of  this  doc- 
trine, realistic  Christian  vinos  would  be 
peculiarly  called  forth  by  the  opposition 
to  all  Gnostic  attempts  to  set  aside,  or  to 
mutilate  the  one  side  of  [the  doctrine  of] 
the  God-man,  that  is  the  human  part  of    the  outcry  of  those  who  despised  also  his 


It,  to  do  away  with  the  human  nature  of 
Christ,  or,  at  least  either  more  or  less  to 


form."t 

In  Clement  of  Alexandria,  pure  Chris- 


deprive  it  of  the  proper  attributes  of  hu-  |  tianity  was  on  this  point  disturbed  by  in 
inanity, — and  especially  by  the  opposition  I  termixture  with  Neo-Platonic  ideas.  The 
to  Docetism.  The  consciousness  of  the  !  Neo-Platonic  philosopher  wished  to  have 
objective  reality  of  the  human  nature  of  I  a  Christ,  freed  from  the  wants  and  imper- 


Christ,  and  his  appearance  in  the  flesh,  |  fections  of 
the  idea  of  the  form  of  a  servant  taken 
upon  him  by  Christ,  was  declared  during 
this  opposition  [to  Gnosticism]  strongly 
and  clearly.  Thus,  Ignatius  of  Antioch 
can  find  no  words  sufficiently  strong  in 
his  opinion,  to  express  the  confidence  of 
the  Christian  persuasion  on  this  point, 
and  he  says  in  an  original  manner  of  the 
Docetae.  that  they  who  would  make 
Christ  only  an  apparition,  were  them- 
.selves  only  like  apparitions.*  "How 
comes  it  that  thou  makest  Christ  half  a 
lie  r"  says  TertuUianf  to  a  Docetist : 
''  he  was  wholly  truth  !"  And  the  same 
writer  in  another  place,t  "  It  is  oftensive 
to  you  to  think  that  the  child  is  taken 
care  of  in  swaddling  clothes  and  caressed  ! 
Dost  thou  despise  this  reverence  shown 
to  nature  .''  and  how  wert  thou  born  thy- 
self.?   Christ,  at  least,  loved 

man  born  under  these  conditions  [and 
charged  with  these  infirmities]  ....  For 
his  sake  he  came  down,  for  his  sake  he 
let  himself  down  to  every  humiliation, 
even  unto  death he  loved,  to- 
gether with  man,  both  his  birth  and  his 
flesh."  In  opposition  to  Docetism,  the 
idea  of  the  form  of  a  servant,  taken 
upon  him  by  Christ,  as  it  peculiarly 
suited  this  primitive  Christian  spirit,§ 
which    opposed    itself     to     heathenism 


*     diVTCI  Tlj  i'.M»  Orri;  i.lUlfJI.'tfVU  K'U  iuifACtlMt. 

■j-  De  Carne  Christi,  c.  .">. 

i  L.  c.  c.  14.  [c.  4.  Ed.  Riffalt.  Tn  the  pas- 
sage as  it  is  found  at  length  in  TertuUian,  the  in- 
firmities attendant  on  the  birth  and  infancy  of  a 
child  are  enumerated  and  mentioned,  as  things 
which  Marcion  looked  upon  with  horror  or  con- 
tempt; and  the  argument  appears  to  lie,  "though 
you  consider  these  things  derogatory  to  the  dignity 
of  man's  nature,  our  Saviour  did  not ;  he  loved 
the  race  of  man,  though  encompassed  with  all 
these  weaknesses,"  &c.  In  the  portion  selected 
by  Neander,  this,  perhaps,  is  not  sufficiently  ap- 
parent.—H.  J.  R.j 

«,  See  Part  II. 


and  utterly  unafliicted 
by  it,  and  this  Christ  was  to  represent 
to  him  the  Ideal  of  u7ex^uct\  and  there- 
fore, he  must  not  be  subjected  to  hunger 
and  thirst,  to  the  sensations  of  pain, 
to  pleasure  or  displeasure.  But  in  tliis 
case,  how  could  the  form  of  the  his- 
iorical  Christ  of  Scripture  be  maintained  ? 
The  forced  explanation  was  to  be  used, 
that  Christ,  although  not  subject  to  tliose 
affections  by  his  nature,  had  subjected 
himself  to  them  voluntarily  {kcct  oIkomo- 
fjudv)  with  a  peculiar  view  to  the  salvation 
of  man.J  ISevertheless,  Clement  in  a  re- 
markable manner  Avith  this  view,  which 
does  not  accept  the  servant's  form  of 
Christ  in  its  full  extent,  united  the  other 
view,  which  carried  it  to  the  extreme. 
But  even  this  suited  his  philosophical 
ideas ;  "  the  unsightliness  and  formless- 
ness of  Christ's  appearance  ought  to  teach 
men  to  look  upwards  towards  the  invi- 
sible, incorporeal  and  formless  nature  of 
God."§ 

But  while  from  the  beginning,  the  true 
and  real  humanity  of  Christ  was  main- 
tained; yet  at  first,  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  different  parts  which  belong  to 
the  completeness  of  man's  nature,  M-as 
either  not  brought  at  all,  or  only  brought 
forward  in  individual  cases,  and  even  then 
witli  only  a  dim  consciousness  about 
them.  Under  the  notion  of  an  assumption 
of  man's  nature  nothing  was  thought  of 
but  the  assumption  of  a  human  body,  as 
in  Irenscus  we  find  this  only  clearly 
spoken  of.     Justin,  on  the  formation  of 

*    De  Carne  Christi,  c.  9. 

f  Nee  humanae  honeslatis  corpus  fuit,  nedum 
coelcstis  claritatis. 

i  Clemens,  Strom,  vi,  649-50.  [Pott.  775. 
Sylb.  276.     Klotz  iii.  140.] 

§  Strom,  iii.  470,  o  Xgis-Tcc  ev  a-ctez-t  &>ii>ii  Shxh- 
At/8aif  Kit  afAO^i^o;,  sic  to  usJsf  x«i  (5<r&i//atTcv  T«f  Bin; 
a.iTt3.i  aTc/ikeruv  itjurt^  StS:t(TKU  [Pott.  559.  Sylb. 
202.     Klotz  ii.  271.] 


TERTULLIAN   ON   TEIE     SOUL    OF    CHRIST. 


whose  mind  the  Platonic  pliilosophy  had 
some  induence,  appears  to  have  formed  j 
to  himself  the  following  peculiar  chain  ' 
of  ideas  :  Christ,  as  the  God-man,  consists 
of  three  parts,  like  every  other  man — of 
the  body,  the  animal  sonl  (the  inferior^ 
principle  of  life,)  and  ihef  tliinking  reason; 
only  with  this  dillerence,  that  the  place 
of  the  fallible  human  reason,  which  is  j 
only  a  beam  of  the  Divine  reason,  of  the  I 
>.o7i;,*  is  snppliedf  in  him  by  the  g-eneral  ' 
Divine  reason  {he  >,,yo<;  itself;!  and  hence 
in  Cliristianily  alone  could  the  universal  ^ 
revelation  of  religious  truth  be  given,  | 
without  being  obscured  by  any  one- 
sidedness.§  | 

Tertullian  was  the  first  who  definitely ! 
and  clearly  proclaimed  the  doctrine  of  a ' 
proper  human  soid  in  Ciirist,  being  led' 
to  this  by  his  view  of  the  relation  of  the 
soul  to  the  body  in  general,  and  by  the  j 
direction  taken  by  his  controversy  about 
tlie  person  of  Christ  in  particular.  He  j 
did  not  assume,  like  otliers,  that  there  are 
the  t/iree  above  mentioned  parts  in  human  | 
nature,  he  only  acknowledged  two  parts  ! 
in  it;  he  maintained  that  we  must  not! 
consider  a  mere  animal  soul  distinct  from  j 
the  rational  soul  in  man  to  be  the  ani- 
mating principle  of  the  body,  but  that  in 
all  livinff  beings  the  animating  principle  i 
[//7f  77;//^,  being]  is  one  only,  but  in  the  case 
of  man's  nature  that  this  is  furnished  with 
liigher  powers,  and  that  the  thinking  soul  j 
itself  is  also  the  animating  [soul]  of  the  | 
human  body.||  When  Tertullian  acknow- 
ledged only  one  soul  as  the  means  of ; 
communication  between  the  Divine  Logos  1 
and  the  body  in  Christ,  he  must  neces- 
sarily have  thought  here  of  a  j)roper  rea-j 
sonable  human  soul.  And  farther,  he 
was  in  controversy  with  a  Valentinian 
sect,  which  taught  that  Christ,  instead  of 
investing  his  soul  with  a  gross  material 
body,  had  so  modified  the  >]/t;x*ii  that  it 
migiu  become  visible  to  the  senses  of 
man  [lileraUij,  to  the  sensuous  man]  like 

•  The  TTTfouA  Koyuiv,  the  Kiyi(  tr^sg^aTotsc,  the 
y.y.i  xtTH  yi^of. 

I  Apol.  II.  §  10.  And  yet  one  niiq;ht  suspect 
that  the  word-s  »<i  <rafAX  utt  X'.ycv  km  •^■j^mv  were 
interpolated  hy  a  later  hand,  with  the  intention  of 
niakins?  Justin  orthodox  on  tliis  point,  herause 
this  more  precise  determination  on  the  matter  does 
not  occur  any  where  else  in  Justin,  and  does  not 
seem  aItos;ether  in  its  place  here.  But,  to  say  the 
truth,  the  first  reason  cannot  be  a  very  strikinfj 
proof;  nor  indeed,  the  second  either,  in  the  case 
of  a  writer,  whose  works  are  like  those  of  Justin. 

^   K:yiic:v  TS  «.:v. 

§  Justin  is  the  predecessor  of  Apollinaris 

I   De  aninia,  c.  12. 


395 

a  body.  Against  this  sect  he  maintains, 
that  we  must  necessarily,  in  the  person 
of  Christ,  as  in  the  case  of  every  other 
man,  distinguish  between  soul  and  body, 
and  the  attributes  of  each,  and  that  lie 
[/.  e.  Christ,]  in  order  to  redeem  man, 
must  [ilace  a  proper  lumiaii  sold  in  union 
with  himsL'U,  and  indeed,  so  much  the 
more,  inasmuch  as  tiie  soul  conij)oses  tlie 
proper  nature  of  man.* 

Oii;fen,  however,  had  greater  influence 
than  Terlullian  on  the  duvelopment  and 
the  selllement  of  this  doctrine  in  the  doc- 
trinal system  of  the  Church.  His  strug- 
gles to  attain  an  inward  living  intuition 
into  the  doctrines  of  the  faith,  his  peculiar 
philosophical  education,  and  his  spirit  tliat 
longed  after  a  systematic  connection  of 
ideas,  led  him  to  an  erudite  and  scientific 
development  of  this  doctrine.  The  com- 
munion of  believers  with  Christ  alforded 
him  an  analogy  for  the  union  of  the  Di- 
vine Logos  with  the  human  nature  in 
Christ.  From  the  derived  Divine  life  of 
believers,  which  is  to  appropriate  to  itself 
and  penetrate  by  degrees  more  and  more 
their  whole  human  nature,  even  to  the 
completion  [of  this  process]  at  the  general 
restoration,  from  tliis  Origen  reverted  to 
the  original  source  of  this  Divine  propa- 
gation of  life  in  man's  nature,  which,  in 
his  view,  was  Christ  as  the  God-man.  If, 
as  St.  Paul  says,  believers  become  one 
spirit  with  the  Lord;  this  has  happened 
[according  to  the  view  of  Origen]  in  a  far 
higher  manner  with  t/iul  soul,  wliich  the 
Logos  has  received  into  an  indissolnt)le 
union  with  himself.  According  to  the 
theory  of  Origen,  it  is  the  original  destina- 
tion of  the  soul,  to  be  wholly  spirit  {vov;,) 
and  to  find  its  life  only  in  communion  with 
the  Logos.  That  which  happened  with 
other  souls  only  in  the  highest  concerns 
of  the  inward  life,  namely,  that  they  enter 
wholly  into  conimimion  with  the  Logos, 
and  wholly  forget  themselves  in  the  intui- 
tion of  the  Divine,  this  had  become  with 
that  soul  something  constant  and  tminter- 
rupted,  so  that  its  whole  life  had  passed 
into  the  commvinion  with  the  Logo.s, 
and  it  had  become  itself  entirely  made 
Divine.t 

As  Origen,  still  farther,  in  every  man 
distinguished  the  irnvua.  from  the  ^vx,ri 
in  the  stricter  sense  of  the  word  :  so  also 
he  applied  this  distinction  to  the  hnnian 
nature  of  Christ.     Christ  [in   his  view] 


•   De  came  Christi,  c.  1 1 .  et  seq. 

j-   iij  fxov.f  KUV0HI13J  u>A*  ittr^ic  x*/  iJv««jaT/f,  t)»c 


396 


SYSTEM    OF    ORIGEN. 


represents  the  Ideal  of  human  nature  in 
the  verij  circumslance.,  that  ail  activity, 
all  conduct,  and  all  sufli^ring  in  him  pro- 
ceeded from,  and  was  surrounded  in,  that 
supreme  [source,]  whicii  was  in  his  whole 
human  nature  the  animating  principle. 
"  As  the  holy  man,"  says  Origen,  "  lives 
in  the  -n-^Ev/Aa,  as  that  from  which  his 
whole  life,  every  action,  every  prayer,  and 
the  praise  of  God  proceeds,  thus  he  does 
all  which  he  does,  in  the  Spirit ;  yea, 
Avhen  he  sufl'ers,  he  suffers  also  in  the 
Spirit,  [f  this  be  so  in  the  case  with  the 
holy  man,  how  mucli  more  must  we  af- 
firm this  of  Jesus,  the  forerunner  of  all 
holy  men,  with  whom,  when  he  took 
upon  him  the  whole  of  man's  nature,  the 
mvivua.  set  all  the  rest  of  his  human  quali- 
ties into  movement."* 

But  as  we  observed,  it  was  a  chief  point 
in  the  system  of  Origen,  that  all  in  the  world 
of  Spirits  must  be  limited  and  subjected 
to  conditions  dependent  on  the  differences 
of  the  moral  direction  of  the  will.  From 
this  general  law  of  the  order  of  the  world 
he  was  able  to  allow  of  no  exception  in 
the  case  of  tliis  supreme  dignity,  to  which 
a  soul  attained.  That  soul,  through  the 
faithful  direction  of  its  will  towards  the 
Divine  Logos,  and  by  affection  to  him, 
through  which  it  had  always  remained 
united  with  him,  had  deserved  that  it 
should  after  such  a  manner  become  al- 
together One  with  him.f  Thus  all  here 
corresponds  with  the  destination  con- 
formable to  his  nature;  the  soul,  which 
the  Logos  received  into  personal  union 
with  himself,  has  obtained  the  highest 
destination  attainable  by  any  Spirit,  and 
it  is,  therefore,  become  the  instrument^ 
through  which  the  communication  of 
Divine  Life  by  inward  communion  with 
the  Logos,  shall  extend  itself  also  to  all 
other  souls.  And  again  it  suits  the  na- 
ture of  the  soul,  that  it  should  unite  itself 
with  a  body,  and  become  the  intermediate 


*  T.  32.  Joh.  c.  xi.  This  is  a  just  doctrinal  re- 
mark, but  it  is  one  which  Origen,  with  whom 
this  often  happens,  when  he  inserts  his  own  doc- 
trinal distinctions  of  ideas  into  Scripture,  wishes 
to  support  by  a  passage  to  which  it  is  altogether 
foreign,  if  we  look  at  the  meaning  of  the  words : 
viz.  Joh.  xiii.  21,  tr^ifi'^x  tod  Tm-j/mr:. 

f  TTipt  ('fx^'v,  L.  ii.  c.  6.  c.  Ccls. ;  L.  ii, 
c.  9.  and  c.  23;  L.  iii.  c.  41.  In  Joh.  t. 
i„  33;  t.  xix.  5;  where  he  says  altogether 
after   a  Platonic  fashion,   m   -^yx"  '^'■'^   'J««"cu  tfA- 

WCX(T8U5//fra     TW     OXW    K-,TU(t>    lK.Hm tllC    K.'.VfA'i^    Vin- 

to;  tcdv  IJcifv  being  synonymous  with  vcyc  or  the 


itself- 


ifxTrifii^X'l^i 


•■X''- 


i-t.yufy'j\i7-x  ITT  axirm    tou;   ^aO-iTtyv/usv:!;,-.     In  Malt, 
34-i,  423,  H.  15,  in  Jercm.  f.  147. 


connecting  principle  between  this  and  the 
Logos. 

As  Origen  supposed  a  peculiar  connec- 
tion to  exist  between  every  soul,  and  the 
body  which  serves  it  as  an  instrument — 
(considering  that  every  soul  does  receive 
such  a  body,  which  corresponds  to  its 
condition  as  derived  from  a  former  state, 
either  an  instrument  which  will  willingly 
lend  itself  to  spiritual  activity ;  or  such 
an  one,  as  will  specially  impede  and  op- 
pose it) — thus  he  applied  this  principle 
to  the  relation  between  that  soul  and  the 
body  which  was  bestowed  upon  it  as  an 
instrument.  The  noblest  soul  was  to 
appear  in  the  noblest  body,  which  was 
the  purest  and  most  free  instrument  of  the 
Spirit.  But  this  dignity  of  the  body  of 
Christ  was,  like  the  glory  of  the  Logos 
at  his  appearance  here,  a  hidden  glory. 
Here  also  the  earthly  life  of  Christ  is  an 
image  of  the  spiritual  activity  of  the 
Logos.  As  the  Logos  (see  above)  re- 
veals himself  in  different  ways  to  men, 
according  to  their  different  capabilities ; 
thus  Christ  appeared  to  the  greatest  num- 
ber in  the  unattractive  form  of  a  servant, 
but  to  those  who  had  eyes  to  perceive  it, 
he  showed  himself  in  an  ennobled  form. 
Thus  Origen  was  able  to  unite  with  his 
theory  of  the  correspondence  between 
the  soul  and  body  of  Christ,  even  the 
common  representation  of  the  unattrac- 
tiveness  of  the  outward  appearance  of 
Christ,  in  fact  to  reconcile  Ps.  xliii.  2, 
[xlv.  2 }]  and  Isaiah  liii.  3 ;  the  passage 
on  whicli  that  common  representation  was 
founded.  This  glory  of  the  body  of 
Christ,  which  was  usually  hidden  here 
below,  and  only  shone  forth  on  particu- 
lar occasions  to  those  who  were  worthy 
of  it,  was  to  come  forth  fully  after  his 
glorification,  the  body  was  then  to  be 
freed  from  the  imperfections  of  sense, 
and  be  ennobled  into  an  ethcrial  nature 
more  analogous  to  the  spirit.  Tiiis 
change  vvould  be  entirely  conformable  to 
the  nature  of  matter,  which  in  its  own 
nature  is  wholly  indefinite,  and  capable 
of  receiving  different  forms  and  quali- 
ties.* 

By  means  of  Origen,  who  wrought  out 
this  doctrine  so  systematically,  the  idea 
of  a  proper  reasonable  soul  in  Christ 
received  a  new  dogmatical  importance. 
This  point,  which  up  to  this  time  had 


•  See  c.  Cels.  i.  32  ;  iv.  15;  vi.  75.  et  son.; 
ii.  23;  iii.  42.  On  the  Ubiquity  of  the  glorified 
body  of  Christ,  see  in  Matt,  iv.  Ed.  dc  la  Rue,  p. 

887. 


DOCTRINE    OF   REDEMPTION. 


397 


been  altogether  untouched  in  the  contro- 
versy with  the  Patripassians,  was  now 
for  the  first  time  expressly  brought  for- 
ward in  the  Synod  held  against  Beryllus 
of  Bostra,  A.  D.  244 ;  and  the  doctrine 
of  a  reasonable  human  soul  in  Christ  set- 
tled as  a  doctrine  of  the  Church.  But  as 
Origen  w^as  the  first  who  so  completely 
carried  out  the  theory  of  this  distinction, 
as  he  found  in  the  spiritual  communion 
of  believers  with  the  Redeemer  an  analogy 
for  the  union  of  that  soul  witli  the  Logos 
in  Christ,  so  he  drew  upon  himself  from 
those,  who  maintained  the  old  mode  of 
conceiving  tlie  matter,  the  reproach  that 
he,  like  many  Gnostics,  made  a  distinc- 
tion between  a  higher  and  a  lower  Christ, 
or  between  a  Jesus  and  a  Christ ;  or  that 
lie  made  Jesus  to  be  a  mere  man,  who 
only  differed  from  other  holy  men  by  a 
liigher  degree  of  communion  with  the 
Logos,  that  is,  differed  from  them  only  in 
degree.*  Thus,  we  perceive  also  here 
the  germ  of  a  difference,  which  entered 
into  the  following  period  of  the  Church. 

As  far  as  relates  to  the  work  of  redemp- 
tion itself,  we  find  already  existing  in  this 
period  all  the  fundamental  elements  of 
the  development  of  this  doctrine  as  held 
in  the  Cliurch ;  only,  however,  not  so 
precisely  defined  and  not  so  sharply  sepa- 
rated. For  the  most  part  the  Church- 
teachers  spoke,  without  striving  after  any 
very  sharp  distinction  of  doctrinal  con- 
ceptions, out  of  the  fulness  of  the  Chris- 
tian feeling,  and  tlie  Christian  intuition, 
which  had  accrued  to  them  from  the 
lively  appropriation  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  Bible.  The  doctrine  of  Redemption 
has  two  sides,  a  negative  and  a  positive 
side,  in  relation  to  the  condition  from 
which  mankind  was  set  free,  and  in  rela- 
tion to  the  new  condition  into  which  it 
is  to  be  placed — the  assumption  of  man's 
nature  with  all  the  consequences  of  sin, 
which  had  hitherto  prevailed  in  it,  and 
with  the  guilt  whicli  burdened  it  [thus 
making]  a  communion,  Avitli  sinful  hu- 
manity, weighed  down  with  a  conscious- 
ness of  its  own  guilt — and  the  perfection 
of  an  ideal  holiness  [literalhj,  of  the 
Ideal  of  holiness,]  in  this  human  nature, 
hitherto  under  the  dominion  of  sin,  [thus 
effecting]  a  communication  of  a  Divine 
life  to  this  nature  and  ennobling  it.  Both 
these  important  points,  although  at  first 
they  were  not  so  sharply  separated  from 


each  other,  were  to  be  specially  main- 
tained against  Docetism  and  similar  Gnos- 
tic views,  througli  which  Christ  was  more 
or  less  withdrau-n  from  communion  with 
the  real  and  true  nature  of  man.  Irenanis 
brings  forward  especially  the  latter  i)oint 
of  view  with  great  strength,  allhougli  the 
first  is  not  wholly  wanting  [in  him.]  We 
will  now  present  a  comiected  view  of  his 
ideas  on  this  subject  :*  "  Only  the  Word 
of  tlie  Father  could  reveal  the  Father  to 
us,  and  we  coidd  not  learn  from  him 
unless  the  Teacher  himself  had  appeared 
to  us.  Man  must  accustom  himself  to 
receive  God  into  himself,  God  is  to 
accustom  himself  to  dwell  in  human 
nature.  The  Mediator  between  the  two 
must  restore  the  communication  between 
them,  by  means  of  his  affinity  to  both, 
and  he  must  pass  through  every  age  of 
life,  in  order  to  sanctify  every  age  (i.  e. 
human  nature  according  to  all  its  several 
degrees  of  development)  [by  means  of] 
the  perfect  likeness  of  God,  which  is 
perfect  holiness.f  In  a  human  nature, 
which  was  that  very  nature  that  was 
bound  captive  by  sin,  he  condemned  sin, 
and  banished  it,  as  now  being  condemned, 
out  of  human  nature,  Rom.  viii.  3,  but  he 
required  of  man  to  become  like  him. 
Men  were  the  prisoners  of  evil,  and  of 
Satan,  Christ  gave  himself  up  for  the  re- 
demption of  the  prisoners.  Evil  reigned 
over  us,  who  belonged  to  God,  God  re- 
deemed us  not  with  might,  but  in  a 
manner  consistent  with  justice,  as  he  re- 
deemed those  who  were  his.;j;  If  he  had 
not,  as  man,  conquered  the  adversary  of 
man,  the  enemy  would  not  have  been 
conquered  in  a  right  manner;  and,  on  the 


•  See  many  of  the  passages  cited  and  referred 
to,  and  the  Apology  of  Pamphilus  for  Origen,  t. 
iv.  p.  35. 


•  [LUerally,  we  will  represent  hh  ideas  ac- 
cordin;;  to  their  inward  connection. — H.  J.  R.] 

■j-  i/jL'.LctJK  T.u  ©2:t>,  accordin;^  to  the  views 
[litcr/tlli/,  the  connection  of  ideas]  of  this  Father 
is  different  from  the  tinoaiv  rw  &t:u,  which  latter 
expression  denotes  only  Ihe  framework  [.\nlage] 
for  a  likeness  to  God,  which  has  its  foundiition  in 
the  reason  and  in  the  freewill.  [X.  B.  In  the 
text  I  have  supplied  the  words  ['by  means  of] 
which  seem  to  be  necessary,  from  Ircnaus,  lib.  ii. 
c.  22,  Ed.  Massuet.  (39  in  other  editions,)  which 
appears  to  me  the  passage  referred  to  here. — H. 
J.  R.] 

t  This  thought  often  occurs  in  the  Church- 
teachers  [the  Fathers'!]  under  different  forms. 
The  just  notion,  which  is  the  foundation  of  it,  is 
this,  that  redemption  is  no  act  of  caprice ;  but  a 
method  consonant  to  law  and  order,  and  answer- 
ing the  conditions  re(inired  by  the  moral  order  of 
the  world,  a  nxelhod,  by  which  God  freed  the 
beings,  who  belonged  to  him  by  their  original  na- 
ture, from  the  dominion  and  coase<iucncc3  of  evil, 
and  led  them  back  to  himself. 
2L 


398 

other  side,  if  he  had  not,  as  God,  given 
this  salvation,  then  we  should  not  have 
it  in  a  secure  manner.  And  if  man  had 
not  been  united  with  God,  then  he  could 
not  have  participated  in  an  incorruptible 
life.*  Through  tlie  obedience  of  one 
man,  must  many  be  made  righteous,  and 
obtain  salvation,  for  eternal  life  is  the 
fruit  of  righteousness.  What  that  means, 
that  man  is  created  after  the  image  of 
God,  was  hitherto  not  revealed, f  for  the 
Logos  was  still  invisible ;  and,  therefore, 
man  easily  lost  even  the  likeness  to  God. 
But  when  the  Logos  became  man,  he 
sealed  both.  He  revealed  truly  the  image, 
while  himself  was  that  which  his  image 
was,  and  he  represented  in  a  secure  man- 
ner the  likeness  of  man  to  God,  while  he 
made  man  like  the  invisible  God."t  The 
other  side  is  brought  forward  by  Justin 
Martyr,  when  he  says,§  "The  law  pro- 
nounced the  curse  upon  all  men,  because 
no  man  can  fulfil  it  in  its  whole  extent. 
Dent,  xxvii.  26  \  Christ  freed  us  from 
this  curse,  by  bearing  it  for  us."  The 
author  of  the  Letter  to  Dlognetus  joins 
the  two  together:  "God,  the  Lord  and 
Creator  of  the  universe,  is  not  only  full 
of  love  to  man,  but  also  full  of  long 
sufTering.  He  was,  and  alioays  is  such  a 
one,  and  always  will  be  such  a  one,  the 
benevolent,  the  angerless,  and  the  true, 
the  only  good  I  He  made  a  great  and 
inexpressible  resolution,  which  he  com- 
municated only  to  his  Son.  As  long  as 
he  kept  this  resolution,  as  a  secret  one,  to 
himself,  so  long  he  appeared  to  have  no 
care  for  us.  During  the  time  past,  he 
suffered  us  to  follow  our  own  lusts,  as  we 
chose,  not  as  if  in  general  he  had  any 
pleasure  in  our  sins,  but  in  order  that  we, 
after  we  had  proved  ourselves  during  that 
time  through  our  own  works  unworthy 


JUSTIN   MARTYR. — ORIGEN. 


*  The  communication  of  a  Divine  Life  to  man 
through  Christ,  thfi  haiTii  ttpo^  Cp(l-j^<ri:tv. 

I  Two  ideas  are  here  to  l)e  taken  together, 
which  were  already  in  existence  in  Philo,  that 
man,  as  the  image  of  God,  had  been  created  after 
the  image  of  the  Logos,  and  that  God  had  already 
had  for  his  aim  as  the  original  form  of  human  na- 
ture, the  Ideal  of  the  whole  nature  of  man,  repre- 
sented in  the  person  of  the  (jod-man.  Limus  ille 
jam  turn  imaginem  inducns  Chrisli  futuri  in  carne, 
non  tantuni  Dei  opus,  scd  et  pignus  fdii,qui  homo 
futurus  certior  et  vcrior.  Tertull.  de  carne  Christi, 
C.  6.  adv.  Praxeam,  c.  12. 

t  See  Iren.  lib.  iii.  20.  Massuet.  (al.  22,)  lib. 
iii.  18,  (20,)  .31  ;  v.  IG.  [I  have  not  been  able  to 
verify  and  compare  all  these  quotations,  and  I 
think  there  is  sonic  error  in  the  refjerenccs. — H. 
J.R.] 

§  Dial,  c,  Tryph.  Jud.  c.  30,  p.  322,  Ed.  Col. 


of  life,  might  now  become  worthy  through 
the  grace  of  God,  and  in  order  that  we, 
after  we  had  revealed  our  own  inability 
to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  might 
become  capable  of  that  through  the  power 
of  God.  But  when  the  measure  of  our 
sins  had  become  full,  and  it  htid  been 
fully  revealed  that  punishment  and  death, 
were  before  us  as  our  recompense,  he 
hated  us  not,  but  he  proved  his  long 
suflering.  He  himself  took  our  sins  upon 
him.  He  himself  gave  his  own  Son  as  the 
ransom  price  for  us,  the  Holy  One  for 
sins,  for  what  else  could  our  sins  dis- 
cover, but  his  righteousness .?" 

Now  Origen,  according  to  the  exposition 
of  his  views,  given  above,  considered  that 
the  highest  object  of  the  appearance  and 
operations  of  Christ  on  earth,  was  the  fol- 
lowing; to  set  forth  the  Divine  operation 
of  the  Logos,  limited  neither  by  time  nor 
space,  for  the  healing  and  purification  of 
the  fallen  beings,  in  order  that  sensuous 
men,  who  were  unable  to  lift  themselves 
up  to  the  intuitive  perception  of  the  ever- 
lasting spiritual  operation  of  the  Logos, 
might  be  able  to  raise  themselves  to  [the 
consideration  of  hi.s]  spiritual  nature  from 
his  appearance  in  the  tlesh  ;*  but  accord- 
ing to  his  tlieory,  the  individual  actions 
of  Christ,  besides  this  object  of  setting 
forth  [these  truths]  have  also,  considered 
in  themselves,  a  special  and  salutary 
operation.  And  thus,  also,  about  the 
relation  of  the  passion  of  Christ  to  sin, 
he  might  express  that,  which  was  ac- 
knowledged in  the  common  conscious- 
ness of  Christians  although  he  might 
point  it  out  in  a  manner  peculiar  to 
himself. 

Thus,  he  says,!  "He  took  upon  him- 
self our  transgressions,  and  bore  our  dis- 
eases, the  transgressions  of  the  soul,  and 
the  diseases  of  the  inner  man;  on  account 
of  which  transgressions  and  diseases 
which  he  bore  away  from  us,  he  said  his 
soul  was  troubled  and  disturbed ;"  and  in 
another  place  he  says,J  "This  man,  the 
purest  among  all  creatures,  died  lor  man- 
kind; he,  who  took  our  sins  and  diseases 
upon  himself,  as  he  was  able  to  take  upon 
himself  and  abolish  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world.     His  passion  was  the  means   of 


*  [Literal/i/, '  from  the  sensuous  appearance  to 
the  spiritual  Being,'  von  der  sinnlichen  Erschein- 
ung  zum  geistigen  Wesen.  This  appears  am- 
biguous. I  have,  therefore,  suj)plied  what  is 
requisite  in  English. — H.  J.  R.] 

j  In  .loh.  torn.  ii.  c.  21. 

i  In  Joh.  torn.  28.  c.  14. 


CLEMENT    OP    ROME. 


399 


purification  for  the  whole  workl,  which 
wouhl  have  gone  to  destruction  if  he  liad 
not  died  for  it." 

As  far  as  rehites  to  the  particular  opinion 
of  Origen,  he  thought,  that  according  to 
secret  causes  in  the  nature  of  things,  the 
suffering  of  a  holy  Being  for  tlie  guilty 
Iiad  a  sort  of  magic  power,  in  crippling 
the  power  of  evil  spirits,  and  freeing  the 
former  [the  guilty]  from  the  evils  that 
impended  over  them,  and  he  appealed  to 
the  belief  existing  even  among  the  iiea- 
ihen,  that  innocent  individuals  by  a  volun- 
tary sacrifice  of  themselves  had  saved  na- 
tions and  cities  from  heavy  calamities.* 

As  the  whole  nature  of  Christian  life 
depends  upon  a  living  appropriation  of 
the  redemption  through  Christ,  as  all  de- 
pends upon  this,  viz.  that  Christ  slionld 
through  faith  become  in  man  all  in  all,  a 
life-giving  and  a  forming  principle  for  his 
whole  nature;  as,  therefore,  in  Holy 
Scripture,  the  whole  life  of  the  Christian 
is  set  forth  as  a  fruit  of  faith,  a  super- 
structure raised  upon  the  foundation  of 
faith  in  Christ,  as  the  whole  of  practical 
Christianity  is  nothing  else  than  faith 
working  by  love,  so  every  thing  required 
for  the  genuine  conception  of  practical 
Christianity,  both  in  theory  and  in  Life, 
depended  on  this  circumstance,  that  tlie 
right  relation  of  Life  to  the  appropriation 
of  the  work  of  redemption  in  faith  should 
be  set  forth  in  a  clear  manner.  It  had, 
for  the  essential  nature  of  Christian  doc- 
trines, and  for  tlie  true  power  of  Christian 
morals,  and  thereby,  at  least  in  its  conse- 
quences, for  the  Christian  life  itself,  the 
most  prejudicial  consequences,  when  this 
intimate  connection  between  the  objective 
and  subjective  in  Christianity  was  not 
rightly  brought  forward.  It  is,  therefore, 
of  great  consequence,  that,  while  we  ob- 
serve, how  that  intimate  connection  was 
bestowed  upon  the  original  condition  of 
the  Christian  conscience,  we  should  also 
recognise  the  seed  of  the  errors  of  later 
times,  adhering  to  this  connection,  and 
troubling  this  conscience.  The  whole 
mode  of  conception  of  the  doctrine  of  re- 
demption in  this  period,  pledges  for  the 
recognition  of  this  intimate  connection. 


'  See  Origen,  in  Joh.  t  vi.  c.  34;  t.  2S,  c.  14. 
Origen  was  certainly  ri!,'ht  in  one  respect ;  that  is, 
instead  of  deducing  for  himself  a  system  of  reh- 
gious  truth  a  priori  from-  abstract  conceptions,  he 
inquired  after  the  voice  of  the  universal  religious 
conscience  of  man,  and  quoted  this  as  a  witness 
for  the  Christian  doctrine,  although  he  did  not 
understand  this  testimony  rightly  in  one  of  its 
bearings  [Ulerally,  on  one  side.] 


Men  recognised  Ciirist  as  him  who  had 
comnuinicaled  an  inward  Divine  Lili-*  to 
human  nature;  tiirough  faith  in  Ciirist 
this  Divine  Life  was  to  be  received  by 
man  into  himself,  and  to  be  appropriate<l 
to  himself,  and  his  whole  Udiure  to  be 
constantly  more  penelratt'd  by  it. — (it  is 
only  unlorlunate,  that  niL-n  bouml  this 
belief  up  too  nnich  with  the  outward 
things,  which  Christ,  in  consideration  of 
die  necessities  of  the  mixed  naturef  of 
man,  had  appointed  as  tokens  to  repre- 
sent the  Invisible  and  the  Divint-,  which 
faith  apprehends,  and  it  is  unfortunate 
also  that  men  did  not  sulhciently  sepa- 
rate from  each  other  the  operations  of 
faith,  and  of  those  outward  things.) — 
Men  acknowledged  Christ  as  the  destroyer 
of  the  kingdom  of  Satan,  and  they  as.signed 
all  evil  to  this  kingdom,  and  through 
communion  with  Christ,  by  means  of  faith 
every  one  also  was  to  appropriate  to  him- 
self the  victory  of  Christ  over  the  king- 
dom of  Satan;  the  Christian  must,  there- 
fore, (see  above,)  from  a  viiU-s  Satance^ 
become  a  miles  Christi.  The  idea,  also, 
of  the  general  calling  of  all  Christians  to 
a  priesthood,  has  its  root  here. 

We  might  here  bring  forward  separate 
living  [contemporary]  witnesses  to  the 
original  Cliristian  conviction  and  con- 
sciousness of  the  intimate  connection  be- 
tween redemption  ami  sanctification.  Faith 
and  Life.  A  man,  of  whom  it  cannot  be 
said,  that  he  distinguished  himself  by  any 
peculiar  power  of  mind  in  the  elaboration 
of  Christian  doctrine,  viz.  Clement,  the 
bishop  of  Koine,  after  he  had  strongly 
expressed  that  no  man  could  be  justitied 
by  his  own  righteousness  and  his  own 
works,  but  that  all  could  lie  jusiificd  only 
through  the  grace  of  God  and  faith,  says, 
"And  what  shall  we  do  then,  brelliien  .=■ 
Shall  we  be  slack  in  doing  good,  and  ne- 
glect love.'  The  Lord  would  in  no  wise 
suffer  this  to  happen  with  us,  but  lie  in- 
duces us  to  endeavour  to  fuUil  ail  good- 
ness with  unal)atin<r  zeal,  for  tlic  Crtator 
and  Lord  of  all  delights  himself  in  his 
vvorks.":|:  The  author  of  the  epistle  to 
Diognetus,  after  the  heautiful  passage 
quoted  above  [page  40,]  says  of  the 
redemption:  '' VVith  what  delight  wilt 
thou  be  tilled,  when  thou  recogniscst 
this ;  or  how  wilt  thou  love  him,  who 


•   The  a^^iejrit,  about  which  see  above. 

+  [Zi(7cr«//'/, 'the  spiritually -seniu.HH  n:iliirp,' 
i.  e.  a  nature  consisting  partly  of  spiritu  d,  p.irlly 
of  sensuous  elements. — H.  J.  K.] 

4  Sec  Ep.  i.  ad  Corinth.  §  3'^  and  33. 


400 


JUDAIZING   VIEWS    OF   FAITH. 


hath  first  loved  thee  so  much?  But  if 
thou  lovest  him,  thou  wilt  be  a  follower 
of  his  goodness."  Irenseus  thus  contrasts 
the  free  obedience  that  Hows  from  faith 
with  the  servile  obedience  under  the  Law : 
"  The  Law  given  to  servants  formed  the 
soul  through  that  which  is  outward  and 
sensuous,  by  attracting  it  to  obedience  to 
the  commandments,  as  it  were  by  chains 

but  the  Word,  that  makes  free, 

taught  a  free  purification  of  the  soul,  and 
through  that  of  the  body.  After  this  had 
happened,  it  was  necessary  that  the  chains 
of  slavery,  to  which  man  had  become  ac- 
customed, should  be  taken  away,  and  he 
must  follow  God  without  chains.  The 
requirements,  therefore,  of  liberty  must 
be  extended  more  widely,*  and  obedience 
towards  the  king  must  become  greater, 
that  no  one  may  turn  back  and  appear 

unworthy  of  his  liberator for  God 

hath  not  set  us  free,  in  order  that  we  may 
run  away  from  him,  as  no  one,  Avho  severs 
himself  from  the  source  of  all  goodness 
in  the  Lord,  can  find  the  nourish  of  salva- 
tion for  himself,  but  in  order  that  we 
should  love  him  the  more;  because  we 

had  obtained  more To  follow  the 

Saviour,  is  to  partake  of  salvation;  and 
to  follow  the  Light,  is  to  partake  of  the 
Light."! 

It  cannot,  however,  be  denied  that  the 
genuine  Pauline  notion  of  faith  vi'as  soon 
obscured.  In  the  stead  of  faith,  in  that 
peculiarly  Christian  sense  (viz.  the  living 
appropriation  of  that,  which  Christ  has 
efiected  for  human  nature,  as  a  fact  of  the 
inward  Life,  by  means  of  which  some- 
thing altogeUier  different  results  from  that 
[Life,]  men  placed  the  notion  of  a  mere 
belief-upon-authority,  which  could  only 
mediately  introduce  a  new  direction  of 
Life,  but  could  not  immediately  produce 
it.  And  from  this  error,  the  second  ne- 
cessarily followed,  that  men,  instead  of 
considering  all  good  as  the  necessary 
revelation  of  the  new  Divine  Life  planted 
with  faith,  spoke  of  good  works  which 
were  to  be  added  to  faith,  and  that  they 
added  to  that  belief-upon-authority,  the 
doctrine  of  a  moral  law  that  incited  man 
to  good;  both  of  these  being  more  Jew- 
ish  than  Christian.     Here,  also,  as  well 


*  [That  is  (see  the  context  in  the  original,) 
the  law  of  I'recdom  must  even  require  more  of 
man  than  that  of  servitude,  e.  g.  where  the  latter 
forbids  murder,  the  former  must  prohibit  even 
malice,  &c. — H.  J.  R.] 

•}■  Lib.  iv.  c.  13,  14.  [In  the  last  sentence  Mas- 
suet  reads  percipere  lumen,  instead  of  participare 
lumen.— H.  J.  R.] 


as  in  the  history  of  the  formation  of  the 
Church,  and  of  Christian  worship,  a  great 
source  of  the  corruption  of  Christianity 
appears  in  the  intermixture  of  the  Jewish 
and  the  Christian  position,  and  the  Apostle 
Paul  cries  out  to  all  ages,  "Ye  have 
received  it  in  the  spirit,  will  ye  fulfil  it  in 
the  flesh  ?" 

The  Gnostics,  and  in  part,  the  Alexan- 
drians had  that  false  notion  of  faith  be- 
fore them,  when  they  overprized  Gnosis 
in  respect  to  it.  Marcion  (see  above)  ap- 
pears here  clearly  and  deeply  to  have 
conceived  the  Pauline  idea  of  faith,  and 
on  this  side,  not  without  reason,  to  have 
fought  against  the  intermixture  of  Jewish 
and  Christian  things;  we  may  here  cite 
the  heretic  as  a  witness  for  Catholic  truth. 

The  idea,  indeed,  of  that  Divine  com- 
munion of  Life  with  Christ,  as  is  clear 
from  what  has  been  said  above,  was  a 
fundamental  idea  of  the  whole  Church 
system  of  doctrine;  but  the  right  point 
of  view  was  thrown  into  the  background 
by  the  circumstance,  that  men  were  ac- 
customed to  annex  this  Divine  commu- 
nion of  Life,  not  to  the  inward  facts  of 
faith,  but  to  the  outward  things,  which 
were  meant  to  be  for  faith,  only  the  out- 
ward tokens  of  that  which  was  present 
in  the  inward  Life — a  confusion  between 
the  hiward  and  the  Outward,  of  which 
we  have  already  had  occasion  to  speak 
several  times. 

This  shows  itself  particularly  in  fhe 
doctrine  about  the  Church  and  the  Sacra- 
?nents. 

In  the  doctrine  concerning  the  Churchy 
we  have  nothing  to  add  to  that  which 
we  have  said  in  the  history  of  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Church;  we  have  already 
there  pointed  out  the  origin  of  the  con- 
fusion of  tlie  ideas  and  the  predicates  of 
the  invisible  and  the  visible  Church,  and 
its  prejudicial  practical  consequences.  But 
in  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacra- 
ments^ as  standing  in  close  connection 
with  the  history  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church,  we  have  still  much  to  add  to 
that  which  we  have  already  said  in  the 
history  of  the  Christian  worship. 

The  source  of  the  interchange  between 
the  Inward  and  the  Outward*  was  here 
the  same  as  in  the  case  of  the  doctrine 
concerning  the  Church.  Of  that,  which 
is  the  Divine  matter  in  the  Sacrament, 
the  teachers  of  tlie  Church  had  a  lively 
perception  from  their  own  Christian  ex- 


*   See  the  section  relating  to  the  Sacraments  in 
the  history  of  the  Cultus  (or  worship,)  Section  11. 


DOCTRINES    OF   THE    CHURCH. — BAPTISM. 


401 


perience;  but  the  relation  of  this  Divine 
matter  to  the  outward  token  was  not  so 
clear  to  them,  and  with  most  of  them  the 
Spiritual  and  tlie  Sensuous  easily  glided 
into  each  other. 

At  first,  as  far  as  Bnpli.wi  is  concerned 
the  predominant  idea  with  most  of  them 
Avas  this — the  idea  of  a  spiritual  and  sen- 
suous communion  with  the  whole  Christ, 
for  the  salvation  of  the  whole  spiritual 
and  sensuous  nature  of  man.  "  As  out 
of  the  dry  wheat,"  says  lrena;us,  "  neither 
one  mass  of  dough,  nor  one  mass  of 
bread  could  be  made  without  moisture,  so 
neither  could  we  all  become  One  in  Christ 
without  the  water,  which  is  from  heaven. 
And  as  the  dry  earth  brings  fortii  no  fruit, 
if  it  receives  no  moisture ;  so  neither 
could  we,  wlio  are  at  first  dry  wood,  ever 
bring  forth  the  fruit  of  Life,  without  the 
rain,  which  sheds  itself  freely  from 
heaven,  for  our  bodies  by  Baptism,  hut 
our  souls  through  the  Spirit,  have  received 
that  connnunion  with  the  incorruptible 
Being.*  Tertullian  says,  beautifully,  in 
respect  to  the  operation  of  Baptism,]"  "If 
the  soul  comes  to  faith,  and  is  formed 
again  by  regeneration  from  the  water  and 
the  power  from  above,  tliere  she  beholds, 
after  the  scales  of  the  old  corruption  are 
removed,  her  whole  light.  Slie  is  re- 
ceived into  the  communion  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  the  soul  which  unites  itself 
with  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  followed  by  the 
body,  which  is  no  longer  the  servant  of 
the  soul,  but  the  servant  of  the  Spirit." 
But  even  Tertullian  here  was  unable 
rightly  to  distinguish  between  the  Inward 
and  the  Outward.  While  he  defends  the 
necessity  of  outward  Baptism  against  the 
sect  of  Caians  (see  Sect.  II.,)  he  ascribes 
to  the  water  a  supernatural  sanctifying 
power.  And  yet,  even  in  the  case  of  Ter- 
tullian, we  seethe  pure  evangelical  idea 
making  its  way  through  the  midst  of  this 
confusion  of  the  Inward  and  the  Outward, 
and  standing  forth  in  contradiction  to  it 
— when  he  says,  that  Faith  receives  the 
forgiveness  of  sin  in  Baptism,  and  when 
he  says,  while  combating  against  haste  in 
Baptism,  that,  where  a  right  faith  is  pre- 
sent, that  faith  is  sure  of  salvation.;{: 

We  have  observed  already  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  Christian  worship  [Cullus,] 
the  practically  injurious  consequences  of 

*  Iren.  iii.  17.  The  Divine  principle  of  Life, 
soul    and    body   in    Christ,   the    tvaxr/f   jt^oc    for 

i  De    Anima,   c.   41.     Compare  the   passage 
above  cited  on  the  corruption  of  human  nature. 
%  Fides  iategra  eecura  de  salute. 
51 


;  that  confusion  between  the   Inward  and 
the  Outward  in  Baptism.     Wiiile  a  con- 
j  fusion  between  l)aj)lism  and  rcgeneralion, 
regeneration  was  considered  as  a  magical 
I  thing  completed    at  once,    and    while   a 
magical   purification  and  abolition  of  sin 
was  supposed  to  take  place  at  Baptism,  it 
^  became  usual  to  refer  tiie  forgiveness  of 
sins  obtained  through  Christ,  only  rsjjc- 
cially  to  sins  commilted  before   baptism, 
instead  of  maintaining,  as   they  ought  to 
have  done,  that,  as  that  which  is  olijeclive 
in   baptism   retains  its  power  dining  the 
whole  life  of  man  ;  so  also,  the  subjective 
I  appropriation  of  it,  by  means  of  penitence 
I  and   faith,  must,  as  well  as  regeneration, 
[  continue  to  develope  itself  more  and  mure 
through  the  whole  life,  until  the  Objciuive, 
and  the  Subjective,  justification  and  sauc- 
tilication  have    become    wholly    blended 
■  into  each  other  (which  does  not  happen 
i  in  our  life  below.)    But  according  to  that 
false  conception,  ^nce  it  could  not  fail  to 
j  be  remarked  that   even  in  Christians  the 
1  old  corrupt  nature  preserved   its   power, 
i  the     question    woidd    necessarily   arise: 
Whence  do  we  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins 
committed  after  baptism  ?  And  the  answer 
was:    'Since  we   have  once  for  all  ob- 
tained a  satisfaction  for  the  sins  committed 
I  before  baptism,  in  the  merit  of  Christ,  so 
j  in   order  to  obtain  satisfaction   for  those 
after  baptism,  voluntary  penances  [exer- 
cises   of  repentance,]    and   good    works 
'  must  be  added."*     This  point  of  view  is 
;  clearly  presented  to  us  iu  the  following 
words  of  Cyprian  :t    "  When   the   Lord 
came  and  iiealed  tlie  wounds  of  Adam,  he 
gave  to   the  convalescent  a  law,  and  he 
commanded    him    to   sin   no    more,    lest 
something  worse  should  befall  him.     By 
j  the    condition   of  innocence  being   pre- 


•    See  Tertullian's  Book  dc  Pocnitentia.     Tiiis 

!  writer  introduced  the  expression,  satinfudio,  into 
the  doctrine  of  repentance  from  his  system  of  ju- 

I  risprudence ;  but  we  must  not  on  that  account 
ascribe  so  great  an  influence  in  the  formation  of  the 

,  Church  doctrinal  notions  on  this  point,  to  his  mode 
of  representing  the  doctrine  derived  from  his  juris- 
prudence— nor  indeed,  generally  ought  we  [to  as- 

I  cribe  so  great  influence]  to  the  idea  of  any  indi- 
vidual— for  when  once  the  T^arTi»  -ItuJo:  was  in 
existence,  all  the  consecjucnres  conlaine«l  in  it 
would  necessarily,  of  their  own  accord,  devciopn 
themselves  ;  and  more  especially,  as  these  conse- 

I  quences  find  so  many  jwints  in  human  nature,  on 
which  to  attach  themselves. 

I  j-  Dc  Opere  et  Eleemosynis.  [This  passage 
is  found,  though  not  quite  continuously,  in 
the  first  two  pages  of  the  Treatise.  To  judge, 
however,  quite  accurately  of  the  force  of  this 
passage  we  must  compare  it  with  tlic  context, 
— U.JK.] 

2l2 


402 


DOCTRINE    OP  THE   LORd's    SUPPER. 


scribed  to  us,  we  were  limited  to  a  nar- 
row range  ;  and  the  infirmity  of  human 
weakness  knew  not  what  it  should  (]o,  if 
the  grace  of  God  had  not  come  again  to 
its  assistance,  and  showing  to  it  the  works 
of  mercy,  had  opened  to  it  a  way  for  the 
preservation  of  its  health,  so  that  we 
might  hereafter  cleanse  ourselves  by  alms 
from  all  the  uncleanness  that  afterwards 
cleaved  to  us.  Since  the  forgiveness  of 
sins  has  once  been  bestowed  in  baptism ; 
so  also,  by  the  constant  performance  of 
good,  which  is  like  the  renovation  of 
baptism,  man  obtains  anew  for  himself 
the  Divine  forgiveness." 

With  regard  to  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Lorcfs  Supper^  upon  the  whole,  the  same 
remark  may  be  made,  as  those  made 
above  upon  the  doctrine  of  Baptism,  only 
with  the  difference,  that  here,  in  reference 
to  the  relation  between  the  thing  repre- 
sented and  the  outward  sign,  three  dif- 
ferent gradations  may  be  observed  in  the 
representations  made  of  it.  The  most 
predominant  representation  was  that, 
which  we  find  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Ignatius  of  Antioch,  as  well  as  in  Justin 
M.,  and  in  Irena;us ;  namely,  that  of  a 
supernatural  penetration  of  the  bread  and 
wine,  by  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
in  virtue  of  which  those  who  partook  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  were  penetrated  by  the 
Divine  principle-of-life  of  Christ  in  their 
whole  nature,  so  that  their  body  even 
then,  became  thereby  even  now,  a  par- 
taker of  the  power  of  an  imperishable 
life,  and  hence  was  prepared  for  the 
resurrection.*  In  the  North  African 
Church,  on  the  contrary,  in  Tertul- 
lian  and  Cyprian  we  find  no  representa- 
tion at  all  implying  such  a  penetra- 
tion. Bread  and  wine  are  represented 
rather  as  the  symbols  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  but  not  as  symbols  with- 
out efficacy ;  a  spiritual  communion  witli 
Christ  in  the  holy  Supper  of  the  Lord  is 
brought  forward,  and  at  the  same  time  a 
certain  sanctifying  association  with  the 
body  of  Christ  is  also  supposed-f  The 
practice  also  of  the  North  African  Church 
proves  that  the   belief  in   a  supernatural 


*  Therefore,  in  Ignatius,  Ep.  ad.  Ephes.  c.  20, 
the  Holy  Supper  is  called,  <;)*§ju<jtcv  ifiwao-z^, 
('vT/iTorcv  t:i/  yotx  u7rc6:tvttv,  iXKtt  ^ifi»  b  'iiiirou  Xg»irT4> 

JtXTrCVTCC. 

-j-  T<TtulI.  c.  Marcion.  iv.  40,  corpus  mcum, 
i.  c.  lis;ura  corporis  mei.  De  Res.  Cam.  c.  8, 
anima  de  Deo  Kac;inatur,  De  orat.  c.  6.  The 
perpctuitas  in  Christo,  is  a  constant  spiritual 
communion  with  him,  and  ir.dividuitas  a  cor- 
pore  ejus. 


sanctifying  power  in  the  outward  tokens 
of  the  Holy  Supper  prevailed  in  it,  and 
hence  came  the  daily  communion,*  and 
hence  also,  together  with  infant  baptism, 
came  infant  communion.f  While  Joh.  vi. 
5.3,  was  improperly  understood,  of  the 
outward  [sinnlich,  corporeal,  or  sen- 
suous,] participation  in  the  Holy  Supper, 
it  was  concluded  that  no  one  could  attain 
to  salvation  without  such  a  participation 
in  it.J  just  as  it  had  been  concluded  from 
a  misunderstanding  of  Joh.  iii.  5,  that  no 
one  could  be  saved  without  outward 
baptism. 

Among  the  Alexandrians,  and  espe- 
cially in  Origen,  the  distinction  is  brought 
forward,  even  in  his  doctrine  about  the 
Sacraments,  as  well  as  in  his  whole  sys- 
tem of  doctrine,  between  the  inward 
Divine  thing,  the  invisible  spiritual  ope- 
ration of  the  Logos,§  and  the  sensuous 
signil  which  represents  it.  "Just  as  the 
miracles  of  Christ,"  says  Origen,  ''•as  far 
as  their  highest  object  is  concerned,  re- 
present the  healing  power  of  the  Logos, 
which  operates  invisibly,  but  also  at  the 
same  time  an  utility  was  annexed  to  the 
outward  deeds  as  such,  because  they  led 
men  to  believe  :  so  also  is  outward  bap- 
tism, in  regard  to  its  highest  object,  a 
symbol  of  the  inward  purification  of  the 
soul  through  the  Divine  power  of  the 
Logos,  which  is  the  preparation  for  the 
general  restoration  ;  by  the  beginning  of 
that  in  enigmas,  and  in  a  mirror,  which 
will  be  perfected  face  to  face  ;  but  at  the 
same  time,  in  virtue  of  the  words  of  con- 
secration then  uttered,  there  is  united 
with  the  whole  transaction  of  baptism, 
a  supernatural  healing;  it  is  the  begin- 
ning of  the  operations  of  grace,  which 
are  bestowed  upon  believers ;  but  never- 
theless, this  is  only  for  those  who  through 
their  disposition  of  heart  are  capable  of 
receiving  such  operations. "IT 

The  same  distinction  he  also  makes  in 
respect  to  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  distin- 
guishes between  that  which  in  a  metapho- 
rical sense  is  called  the  body  of  Clirist,** 
and  the  true  spiritual  eating  of  the  Lo- 
gos ;'("|  between  the  more  Divine  promise 
and  the  more  common  understanding  of 


*  See  page  213. 

■j-  See  Cyprian,  Sermo  de  Lapsis. 
i  See  Cyprian  lil).  iii.  testinion.  c.  25. 
§  Compare  what  is  said  above  of  the  i7rtf;,fxi* 
(r6»T«,  and  the  jtJh^/*  vo«t». 
II   The  HUTCv,  or  Trvm^u-niKov,  and  the  rt'ioS'T-y. 
1   See  in  Joh.  vi.  c.  17,  and  Matt.  xv.  c.  23. 
**   TO  irce/jiA  Xg/iTTou  tutik-jV  ku  (ru/Jiio\iH.oy. 
ff  The  uAiifi/.K  0^a<ri;  t<.v  Aoj^ot. 


DOCTRINE    AS    TO    THE    LORD  S    SUPPER.  -103 

the  Lord's  Supper,  as  it  was  suited  to  the  I  signification  and  efTicacy  wliatever  of  the 
more  simple.*  The  first  bears  reference  outward  token,  even  such  an  one  as  that 
to  the  spiritual  participation  in  the  Logos  \  which  was  received  in  the  North  African 


that  became  flesh,  who  is  the  true  hea- 
venly bread  of  the  soul.     The  outward 


Church.* 

As  the  Old  Testament  contains  a  fore- 


supper  of  the  Lord  can  be  enjoyed  by  cast  of  the  tilings  of  the  New,  so  Chris- 
the  unworthy  and  the  worthy,  hut  not  tianity  also  gives  hints  of  a  higher  con- 
that  true  heavenly  bread,  for  it  could  not  dition  of  things,  which  is  to  be  prepared 


otherwise  have  been  said,  that  he  who 
eats  that  bread  will  live  eternally.  Ori- 
gen,  therefore,  says,  that  Christ  in  the  true 
sense  has  designated  as  his  flesh  and 
blood  the  word  which  proceeds  from  the 
Word,  and  the  bread  from  the  heavenly 
bread,  the  living  word  of  truth,  through 
which  he  communicates  himself  to  the 
soul,  just  as  the  breaking  of  the  bread 
and  the  division  of  the  wine  is  a  symbol 
of  the  midtiplication  of  the  word,  through 
which  the  Logos  communicates  itself  to 
the  soul.  Even  in  tlie  outward  supper 
of  the  Lord,  as  well  as  in  the  outward 
baptism,  he  supposes  a  higher  sanctifying 
efficacy  in  virtue  of  the  words  of  conse- 
cration then  uttered,  but  in  such  a  man- 
ner that  with  the  earthly  elements  con- 
sidered by  themselves  nothing  Divine  can 
unite  itself;  and,  as  in  baptism,  no  one 
without  the  inward  capability  of  heart 
can  become  partaker  of  this  higher  ef- 
ficacy. As  it  is  not  that  which  enters 
into  the  mouth,  that  can  defile  a  man, 
although  it  might  be  held  to  be  unclean 
by  the  Jews,  so  also  nothing,  which  en- 
ters into  the  mouth,  sanctifips  the  man, 
although  by  the  simple  the  bread  of  the 
Lord,  as  it  is  called,  is  held  to  be  some- 
thing that  sanctifies.  Nor,  indeed,  con- 
sidered by  itself  is  any  thing  wanting  to 
lis  by  the  not  eating  the  bread  conse- 
crated by  prayer,  and  yet  by  the  mere 
eating  it,  considered  by  itself,  we  have 
somewhat  more;  but  the  cause  of  our 
receiving  less  is  the  evil  heart  of  each 
individual  [partaker,]  and  the  cause  of 
his  receiving  more  is  his  good  heart  and 
disposition.  The  earthly  bread,  in  itself, 
is  nothing  difl^erent  from  all  other  food. 
Origen  was,  however,  desirous  only  of 
contradicting  in  particular  the  fanciful  no- 
tions of  some  magical  advantage  in  the 
Lord's  Supper,  independent  on  the  heart  of 
the  recipient,  which  also  the  other  Church- 
teachers  were  far  from  mainiaiiiitig  ;  and 
yet  his  contradiction  touches  every  re- 
presentation which  supposes  any  higher 


♦  The  x.'.n:Tfg-j.  viej  t»c  j'/;^:*^/tt/*c  tKtx»  '^"c 
aTrXova-Ti^cic,  and  that  x-yT-t  t«/  SacTs^^v  ir'y)t\it7, 
which  correspond  to  the  two  conditions  of  yveori; 
and  ■/na-TK. 


by  means  of  Christianity  itself;  but  faith 
must  necessarily  be  inferior  to  actual 
knowledge  and  perception  of  that  condi- 
tion. The  Divine  revehitions  permit  us 
only  to  catch  some  isolated  glimpses  of 
that  higher  state  of  things,  wtiich  do  not 
present  a  complete  picture  of  it.  As  pro- 
phecy is  always  obscure  before  its  fulfil- 
ment, so  also  the  last  prophecies  of 
Christ  about  the  fate  of  his  Church  must 
be  obscure,  until  the  introduction  of  that 
higher  condition  of  the  world.  Although 
so  many  indications  vvere  made  by  our 
Saviour  as  to  the  gradual  activity  and  ef- 
ficacy of  Christianity  in  penetrating  hu- 
man nature,  yet  these  could  not  be  un- 
derstood by  the  first  Christians.  They 
had  no  presentiment  of  the  difl'crent  kinds 
of  contests,  which  the  Cliurch  had  yet  to 
encounter,  before  it  could  attain  to  iUs 
victorious  completion.  They  were  ac- 
customed to  consider  the  church  only  in 
ils  opposition  to  the  heathen  state,  and  it 
was  far  from  entering  llieir  thoughts,  that 
by  the  natural  development  of  circum- 
stances under  the  guidance  of  Providence, 
this  opposition  should  hereafter  cease. 
They  believed  that  the  struggle  of  the 
Christian  Church  with  the  Heathen  slate 
would  continue  on,  until  the  victory 
should  be  conceded  to  it  through  the  im- 
mediate interposition  of  God,  and  through 
the  return  of  Christ.  It  was  natural  enough 
that  the  Christians  should  willingly  em- 
ploy tiieir  thoughts  on  the  prospect  ol' 
this  victory,  during  the  seasons  of  perse- 
cution. It  was  thus  that  many  formed  a 
picture  to  themselves,  which  had  come 
to  them  from  the  Jew.«,  and  which  suited 
with  their  then  condition.  This  was  the 
idea  of  a  willennial  rri^n,  which  the 
Messiah  should  establish  on  earth  as  the 
close  of  the  whole  career  of  the  world, 
during  which  all  the  saint.s  of  all  ages 
were  to  live  together  in  holy  comnninion 
with  each  other.  As  the  world  wa.s 
created  in  six  davs.  and  according  to  Ps. 
xc.  4,  a  thousand  years  in  the  sight  of 
God  is  but  as  one  day,  so  the  world  was 


•  The  passiiRos  in  Origen  are  found  in  t.  xi. 
Matt.  c.  14;  L  32,  Joh.  c.  16.  In  MatL  698. 
V.  iii.  0pp. 


CHILIASM — PAPIAS. 


404 

supposed  to  endure  six  thousand  years  ] 
in  its  present  condition  ;  and  as  the  Sab- 
bathday  was  the  day  of  rest,  so  this  mil-  , 
lennial  reign  was  to  form  the  seventh 
thousand-year  period  of  the  world's  ex- 
istence at  the  close  of  the  whole  tem- 
poral dispensation  connected  with  the 
world.  In  the  midst  of  persecution  it 
was  an  attractive  thought  for  the  Chris- 
tians to  look  to  a  period  when  their 
Church,  purified  and  perfected,  should 
be  tiiumphant  even  on  earth,  the  theatre 
of  their  present  sufferings.  In  the  manner 
in  which  this  notion  was  conceived  by 
many  there  was  nothing  unchristian  in 
it.  They  imagined  the  happiness  of  this 
period  in  a  spiritual  manner,  and  one  that 
corresponded  well  with  the  real  nature 
of  Christianity  ;  for  they  conceived  under 
that  notion  only  the  general  dominion  of 
God's  will,  the  undisturbed  and  blessed 
union  and  intercourse  of  the  whole  com- 
munion of  saints,  and  the  restoration  of 
harmony  between  man  as  sanctified,  and 
all  nature  as  refined  and  ennobled.*  But 
the  gross  images,  which  the  carnal  sense 
of  the  Jews  had  made  to  itself  of  the 
delights  of  the  millennial  reign,  were 
transferred  in  part  also  to  the  Christians. 
Phrygia,  the  dwelling-place  of  a  spirit,| 
which  took  a  fanciful  turn,  and  would 
embody  religious  ideas  in  sensuous 
images,  was  also  inclined  to  the  propa- 
gation of  this  gross  Chiliasm.  In  that 
region,  in  the  first  half  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, Papias  was  living,  as  the  bishop  of 
the  Church  at  Hierapolis,  a  man  of  plain 
piety,  but,  as  the  fragments  of  his  writings 
and  historical  notices  tend  to  prove,  of  a 
very  limited  mind,  and  a  very  uncritical 
credulity.  He  collected  together,  out  of 
oral  traditions,  certain  notices  about  the 
lives  and  sayings  of  Christ  and  the  apos- 
tles ;'|  and  among  these  he  received  much 
which  was  misunderstood  and  false,  and 
thus  he  was  the  means  of  propagating 
many  unfounded  notions  about  the  enjoy- 
ments of  the  millennial  reign.  The  in- 
jurious consequence  of  this  was,  that  a 
relish  for  sensual  enjoyment,  which  was 
in  contradiction  to  the  Gospel,  was  far- 
thered, and  that  much  prejudice  against 
Cluistianity  might  be  engendered  by  it 
among  educated  and  civilized  heathens.§ 


•  So  Bamabous,  c.  15. 

f  [Lit. '  of  a  religious-sensuous  fanciful  spirit:' 
where  fanciful  is  used  for  indulgence  in  the  dreams 
of  an  uncurbed  imagina.tion—Schwarmcriscfie. 
H.  J.  R.] 

+  In  liis  book  entitled  Kcya\i  Kv^ictiutv  i^tiywui;. 

\  See  Orig.  Select,  in  4.  p.  570,  vol.  ii. 


In  the  mean  time  we  must  also  be  very 
careful  not  to  pronounce  sentence  about 
the  Divine  life  itself  from  such  isolated 
representations,  which  are,  perhaps,  no- 
thing but  isolated  admixtures  of  the  carnal 
and  sensuous  mind,  not  thoroughly  pe- 
netrated and  ennobled  by  the  hidden 
Divine  life.  If  we  find  in  an  Irenseus 
vital  Christianity,  and  an  elevated  idea  of 
blessedness,  which  he  made  to  consist  in 
communion  with  God,  notwithstanding 
the  accompaniment  of  those  rash  and 
speculative  representations,  we  must  con- 
clude that  such  sensuous  representations 
might  very  well  exist  in  conjunction  with, 
and  be  engrafted  upon,  an  essentially 
Christian  habit  of  thought  in  those  times, 
when  the  new  creation  of  Christianity 
had  not  yet  been  able  thoroughly  to  pe- 
netrate and  imbue  all  things.  With  Ire- 
ncBUS  the  millennial  kingdom  was  only  a 
stage  of  preparation  for  the  saints,  who 
were  thus  to  be  adapted  gradually  to  a 
higher  state  of  heavenly  existence,  and  to 
the  perfect  revelation  of  the  Divine  glory.* 
It  was  also  exactly  under  this  form  that 
Christianity  might  be  able  to  find  access 
to  a  class  of  sensuous  men,  whose  habits 
of  religious  thought  would  afterwards 
gradually  continue  to  be  more  and  more 
spiritualized,  by  the  practical  influence  of 
the  Gospel,  and  the  inward  change  con- 
stantly produce  in  them  its  outward 
efl^ects. 

If  we  find,  that  Millenarianism  [Chili- 
asmus]  was  then  extensively  propagated, 
and  are  able  to  explain  this  by  the  cir- 
cumstances of  that  period  ;  yet,  we  are 
not  to  understand  by  this,  that  it  ever  be- 
longed to  the  universal  doctrines  of  the 
Church.  We  have  too  scanty  documents 
from  different  parts  of  the  Church  in  those 
times,  to  be  able  to  speak  with  certainty 
and  distinctness  on  that  point.  When  we 
find  Chiliasm  in  Papias,  Irenajus,  J.  Mar- 
tyr, all  this  indicates  that  it  arose  from 
one  source,  and  was  propagated  from  one 
spot.  The  case  is  somewhat  different 
with  those  Churches  which  had — as  for 
instance,  the  Romish  Church  (see  above) 
— an  anti-Jewish  origin.  We  find,  after- 
wards an  antimillenarian  feeling  in 
Rome;  and  might  not  this  feeling  have 
existed  from  the  very  first,  and  only  been 
called  into  greater  publicity  in  the  oppo- 
sition   which    was   made    against   Mon- 


*  Iren.  v.  35.  Crescentes  ex  visione  Domini, 
et  per  ipsum  assuescent  capere  gloriam  Dei  et  cum 
Sanctis  Angelis  conversationem — ^Paullatim  as- 
suescent capere  Deum.  cap.  32. 


SENSUOrS    CHILI  4  SM   IN    EGYPT. 


'105 


tanism  ?  The  same  may  also  be  said  of 
an  antimillcnarian  feeling,  which  Ire- 
n.Teus  conihats,  and  which  he  expressly 
distinguishes  from  the  common  antimil- 
lenarian  feelings  of  Gnosticism.  But  it 
was  natural   enough  that  the  zealots  for 


in  which  thoy  understood  evrrv  thing 
quite  literally.  And  besides  this,  the  al- 
legorical interpretation  of  Scripture  in 
vogue  among  the  Alexandrian  school, 
was  in  general  very  widely  opposed  to 
the    literal    and    sensuous    interpretation 


niillenarianism  should  at  first  be  willing  of  the  Chiliasts.  The  more  moderate 
to  represent  every  opposition  to  it  as  a  Alexandrians,  who  were  not  inclined  to 
Gnostic  feeling.*  extreme  opinions  in  criticism,  did  not  re- 

Two  causes  co-operated  together  in  ject  the  Apocalypse  at  once,  as  altogether 
causing  a  more  general  repression  of  mil-  an  unchristian  book,  in  order  to  take 
lenarianism  ;  on  the  one  hand,  the  oppo-  away  this  support  from  the  ChiliasUs;  but 
sition  to  Montanism,  and  on  the  other, '  they  only  combated  the  literal  iuterpreta- 
the  influence  of  the  spirit,  which  pro- [  tion  of  it.  At  the  same  time,  it  was  natural 
ceeded  from  the  Alexandrian  school.  As  that  the  spirit  of  the  Alexandrian  school 
the  Montanists  laid  much  stress  on  Mil-  should  not  extend  itself  very  easily  from 
lenarian  expectations,  and,  although  they  Alexandria  into  the  other  regions  of 
did  not  entirely  conceive  them  after  a  F-gypt,  which  were  so  far  behind  thi.s 
gross  and  sensuous  manner,!  s^^'ll  propa-  flourishing  seat  of  learning,  as  to  spi- 
gated  in  accordance  with  their  fanciful  ritual  advancement  and  culture.  A  pious 
dreams,  many  extravagant  representa- '  bishop  of  the  Arsenoite  Nomos,  in  Egypt, 
tionsj  of  what  should  take  place  during   named  JVcpos,  was  a  zealous  partisan  of 


the  sensuous  niillenarianism,  and  he 
wrote  a  defence  of  it  against  the  Alexan- 
drian school,  under  the  tide,  '  a  Kefuta- 


the  millennium,  the  whole  doctrine  of 
Chiliasm  lost  all  respect  and  authority. 
An  antimillenarian  party,  which  had  been 

in  existence  considerably  earlier,  obtained  |  lion  of  the  Allegorists'  {i>^tyx' 
an  opportunity  by  this  means  of  attacking 
Chiliasm  more  violently  ;  and  the  most 
vehement  opponents  of  Montanism  appear 
to  have  combated  millenarianism  as  one 
of  the  Montanistic  doctrines.  The  Pres- 
byter Caius,  at  Rome,  in  his  treatise 
against  the  Montanist  Proclus,  endea- 
voured to  brand  Chdiasm  as  an  heretical 
doctrine,  propagated  by  the  abominable 
Gnostic,  Cerinthus;  and  it  is  not  impro- 
bable, although  not  quite  certain,  that  he 
declared  the  Apocalypse  to  be  a  book 
forged  by  Cerinthus  for  the  promotion  of 
that  doctrine. 

The  more  spiritual  and  more  learned 
character  of  the  Alexandrian  school,  which 
had  so  great  a  general  influence  on  the 
spiritualization  of  the  doctrines  of  our  happens,  by  their  zeal  for  such  favourite 
faith,  would  also  tend  to  farther  the  I  opinions,  which  had  no  connection  with 
spiritualization  of  the  ideas  about  the  the  true  nature  of  the  Gospel,  men  became 
kingdom  of  God  and  Christ.  Origen  led  away  very  far  from  that  which  is  the 
was  a  peculiarlv  zealous  opponent  of  the   chief  business  of  practic.il  Chnstiamly; 


yoaia-run-,)  in  which  he  appears  to  have 
thrown  out  a  theory  of  Chiliasm,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  anti-allegorical  mode  of 
deciphering  the  Apocalypse.  This  book 
appears  to  have  been  very  popular  among 
the  clergy  and  laity  of  this  region  as  it 
usually  happens  that  men  are  better 
pleased  to  apply  themselves  to  things 
which  busy  and  charm  the  powers  of  the 
imagination,  than  to  those,  which  sanctify, 
warm,  and  animate  die  heart,  and  take 
the  will  into  their  government.  They 
expected  to  find  here  great  mysteries,  and 
explanations  relative  to  the  future,  and 
many  occupied  themselves  more  with  the 
book  and  theory  of  Nepos,  than  with  the 
Bible  and   ifs  doctrines.      As  it    usually 


sensuous  representations  of  the  mil- 
lennial kingdom,  and  endeavoured  to 
give  a  different  meaning  to  the  passages 
of  the  Old  and  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, on  which  the  Chiliasts  relied,  and 


Iren.  v. 


that  is,  the  Spirit  of  Love.  Those  who 
would  not  enter  into  these  opinions,  were 
denounced  as  heretics,  and  things  went 
so  far,  that  whole  regions  separated 
themselves  from  communion  with  the 
mother  church  of  Alexandria.  After  the 
2.     Transfemntur  quorundam  sen- '  death  of  Nepos,  Korakion,  the  pastor  of 


tentise  ah  hscreticis  serrnonibus.  I  a  country  place  stood  at  the  head  of  th 

nartv.     If  Dionysius,  the  bishop  of  Ale) 


lonysius,  me  uisiiop  oi  .•Mex- 
1  now  chosen  to  exert  his  ec- 


f  TertulUan  at  least  places  the  happiness  of  the  I  party, 
millenariaii  kingdom  in  the  enjoyment  of  all  spiri-    j^,^j| 'jjj 

^ISlSriliauir-l^l^llian.  of  the  wonderful  I  clesias;ical  a.uhority,  and  condemned 
city,  tt  heavenly  Jerusalem  which  was  todescend  ,  these  erroneous  doctrines  Ivy  an  author.ta- 
from  heaven.  '  tive  decree,  the  seed  of  a  lasting  sclusm 


406 


DOCTRINE    OF    THE    RESURRECTION. 


would  Imvebeen  sown,  and  theChiliasm, 
which  they  hoped  to  subdue  by  decrees, 
wouhl  probably  have  become  only  more 
wild  and  fanatical  in  consequence  of  such 
a  proceeding.  But  Dionysius,  the  worthy 
disciple  of  the  great  Origen,  showed  here, 
how  charity,  moderation,  and  true  free- 
dom of  spirit,  which  cannot  consist  except 
with  charity,  may  attain,  what  cannot  be 
effected  by  any  power,  or  any  law  what- 
ever. As  he  did  not,  like  others,  forget 
the  Christian  in  the  bishop,  his  love  for 
souls  induced  him  to  repair  in  person  to 
those  Churches,  and  to  call  the  clergy, 
who  defended  the  opinions  of  Nepos, 
together  to  a  conference,  and  he  permit- 
ted all  the  laity  of  those  Churches,  who 
were  desirous  of  instruction  in  these  sub- 
jects, to  be  present  at  the  conference. 
The  book  of  Nepos  was  laid  before  them, 
and  the  bishop  discussed  its  contents 
with  those  clergy  for  three  days,  from 
morning  to  evening;  he  listened  quietly 
to  all  their  objections,  endeavouring  to 
answer  them  out  of  Scripture,  and  con- 
ducting the  discussion  by  quoting  fully 
irom  Scripture  on  every  point ;  and  the 
consequence  was  a  result  which  seldom, 
indeed,  proceeds  from  theological  disputes ; 
namely,  that  the  clergy  were  thankful  for 
the  instruction  they  had  received,  and 
Korakion  himself,  in  the  presence  of  them 
all,  honestly  retracted  his  former  opinions, 
and  declared  himself  persuaded  of  the 
truth  of  the  contrary  to  them,  A.  D.  255.* 
After  Dionysius  had  thus  restored  unity 
of  faitli  among  his  Churches,  he  wrote 
his  work  about  the  Promises  (tte^*  sTray- 
yiMuv^)  for  the  confirmation  of  those, 
who  had  been  persuaded  by  his  argu- 
ments, and  for  the  instruction  of  others, 
who  still  held  the  opinions  of  Nepos. 
Here  also  the  Christian  mildness  and  mo- 
deration with  which  he  speaks  of  Nepos 
deserves  to  be  remarked.  He  says,  "  In 
many  other  respects  I  reverence  and  love 
Nepos,  for  his  faith,  his  diligence,  his  in- 
timate acquaintance  with  Holy  Scripture, 
and  on  account  of  the  many  hymns  com- 
posed by  him,  in  which  many  of  the 
brethren  still  delight,t  and  I  honour  the 
man   the   more,   because  he   is    already 


entered  into  his  rest.  But  the  truth 
is  dearer  and  of  more  value  to  me  than 
aught  besides :  we  must  praise  him, 
and  agree  with  him,  when  he  says  any 
thing  which  is  right ;  but  we  must  ex- 
amine and  set  him  right,  when  he  writes 
what  does  not  appear  to  be  true." 

In  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rect'um,  the  teachers  of  the  Church  had 
to  defend  this  doctrine  especially  against 
the  Gnostics,  who,  in  part,  explained  the 
passages  of  Holy  Scripture  relating  to  it 
in  a  very  arbitrary  manner,  and  made 
them  mean  only  the  spiritual  renovation 
effected  by  Christianity.  In  this  contro- 
versy they  felt  strongly  how  essentially 
this  doctrine  was  bound  up  with  Chris- 
tianity, inasmuch  as  Christianity  brought 
with  it,  not  the  annihilation,  but  the  en- 
nobling and  the  glorifying  of  that  which 
peculiarly  belongs  to  human  nature  ;  and 
the  de-humanizing  idealism  of  the  Gnos- 
tics was  wholly  incompatible  with  this 
fundamental  principle  of  Christianity.  But 
the  opposition  between  these  two  often 
seduced  them  into  conceiving  this  doc- 
trine of  the  resurrection  after  too  carnal  a 
manner,  and  into  making  to  themselves 
!  too  confined  a  representation  of  the 
identity  between  the  body  after  the  resur- 
rection, and  the  earthly  body.  Origen 
endeavoured  here  also  to  find  out  a  middle 
way  between  these  two  opposite  tenden- 
cies, by  making  more  use  of  what  St.  Paul 
(1  Cor.  XV-)  says  of  the  relation  between 
the  earthly  and  the  glorified  body,  and 
by  distinguishing  the  proper  essential 
substance  of  the  body  [das  eigentliche 
Grundwesen  des  Korpers,]  which  re- 
mains the  same  during  all  the  changes 
of  earthly  life,  and  is  not  annihi- 
lated even  in  death,  from  the  changeable 
form  under  which  it  appears  at  different 
times.  This  essential  substance  of  the 
body  was  to  be  awakened  again  by  the 
influence  of  Divine  Omnipotence  to  a  new 
and  glorified  form,  such  as  would  be  an- 
swerable to  the  glorified  quality  of  the 
soul ;  so  that,  as  the  soul  had  communi- 
cated its  own  peculiar  impress  to  the 
earthly  body,  it  should  communicate  it 
to  the  glorified  one  also.* 


»   Euseb.  vii.  24. 

ciJjA^av  h^v/jL'.uM'x-iii.  This  passage  may  be  taken 
in  two  ways ;  cither  as  it  has  been  translated 
above,  which  suits  well  with  the  custom  of  those 
times  (see  Part  II.)  or  else  it  may  be  translateJ, 
"  in  consequence  of  the  constant  custom  of 
Psalmody  diligently  introduced  by  him  into  the 
Churches,'  &c.;  the  first  appears  the  most  natural. 


•  The  siVoc  ;^«5ajtT)igt^iv  in  the  (rctfA*.  Tmufxt- 
TM'.v,  as  in  the  trcuu  ^u)(^i>cov.  In  part,  he  here 
made  use  of  his  doctrine  of  an  Ckm  [or  substance ; 
matter]  which,  undeterminate  [as  to  form  and 
qualities,  &c.  Transl.]  of  itself,  was  capal)le  of 
receiving  higher  or  lower  qualities  through  the 
fashioning  power  of  God :  and  in  part  he  makes 
use  of  the  doctrine  of  a  dynamical  essential  sub- 
stance of  the  body,  a  Myo!  TTriffAi-riKo;   (ratio  ea 


APOSTOLICAL    FATHERS.  40? 

Tt  follows  from  what  we  have  said  above  The  lime  of  the  first  extraordinary  ope- 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Alexandrians  about !  rations  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  followed 
the  Divine  justice  that  the  Alexandrian  '  by  the  time  of  the  free  development  of 
Gnos<is  must  have  considered,  as  the  final  " 
aim  of  all  things,  a  final  general  redemp- 
tion, tlie  removal  of  all  evil,  and  a  general 


human  nature  in  Christianity;  and  here, 
as  elsewhere,  the  operations  ()f  Chris- 
tianity must  necessarily  be  confined,  be- 
fore it  could  penetrate  farther,  and  appro- 
priate to  itself  the  higher  intellectual 
powers  of  man. 

The  writings  of  the  so-called  apostolic 
Fathers  are,  alas !  come  down  to  us,  for 


return  to  the  original  unity  of  the  Divine 
Life,  from  which  all  proceeded.  (This 
would  be  the  general  a.iroy.a.Taa-T'xa-K;.) 
ButOrigen,  in  consequence  of  his  theory 
about  the  necessary  changeableness  of  the 
will  in  created  beings,  was  seduced  into  the  nuist  part  in  a  very  uncertain  condi- 
?upposing,  that  evil,  which  is  forever  sow-  tion  ;  partly,  because  in  early  limes  writ- 
ing new  seeds,  would  render  necessary  ings  were  counterfeited  under  the  name 
new  processes  of  purification,  and  new  of  these  venerable  men  of  the  Church,  in 
worlds  destined  for  the  purification  of  order  to  propagate  certain  oj)inions  or 
fallen  beings,  until  all  shall  have  re-  '  principles  ;  partly,  because  those  writings 
turned  again  from   multiplicity  to  unity; 'which  they   had   really   published 


and  thus,  that  there  would  be  a  continual 
alteration  between  fall  and  redemption, 
unity  and  multiplicitv.  To  such  a  com- 
fortless system  did  a  notion,  carried  to  the 
extreine,  lead  this  profound  man  !  This 
doctrine  he  has  expressed  with  confidence 
in  his  work  Tn^t  u^x'^t ;  but  still  it  is 
open  to  question,  whether  this  be  not  one 
of  the  subjects  on  which  he  afterwards 
changed  his  views ;  but  still  there  are 
even  in  his  later  writings  traces  of  this 
opinion,  though  not,  perhaps,  any  which 
are  altosether  certain  and  definite.* 


§  III. 


Tlie  history  of  the  most  celebrated 
Fathers. 


The  next  ecclesiastical  writers  who 
come  after  the  apostles,  are  the  so-called 
apostolical  Fathers  (Patres  Apostolici,) 
who  come  from  the  apostolic  age,  and 
must  have  been  the  disciples  of  the  apos 


adulterated,  and  especially  so  to  serve  a 
Judcco-hierarchical  party,  which  would 
fain  crush  the  free  evangelical  spirit. 

We  should  here  iu  the  first  place,  have 
to  name  Barnabas,  the  well  known  fellow 
traveller  of  St.  Paul,  if  a  letter,  which 
was  first  known  in  the  second  century  in 
the  Alexandrian  Church  under  his  name, 
and  which  bore  the  inscription  of  a  Ca- 
tholic Epistle,*  was  really  his  composi- 
tion. But  it  is  impossible  that  we  should 
acknowledge  this  epistle  to  belong  to  that 
Barnabas,  who  was  worthy  to  be  the 
companion  of  the  apostolic  labours  of  St. 
Paul,  and  had  received  his  name  from  the 
power  of  his  aniinated  discourses  in  the 
Churches.|  We  find  a  difierent  spirit 
breathing  throughout  it,  than  that  of  such 
an  apostolic  man.  We  perceive  in  it  a 
Jew  of  Alexandrian  education,  who  had 
embraced  Christianity,  who  was  prepared 


ties.     The  remarkable  diflerence  betvveen  |  by  his  Alexandrian  education  for  a  spi 
the  writings  of  the   apostles  and  those  of  ritual  conception  of  Christianity  ;  but  who 


the  apostolical   Fathers,  who  are  yet  so 
close  upon  the  former  in  point  of  time,  is 


set  loo  high  a  value  on  his  Alexandrian 
and    Jewish    Gnosis,    who     looked    for 


a  remarkable  phenomenon  of  its  kind,  j  especial  wisdom  in  a  mystical  and  fancifulj 
While  in  other  cases  such  a  transition  is  |  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament,  more 
usually  quite  gradual,  in  this  case  we  find  resembling  the  spirit  ol  Philo  than  that  of 
a  sudden  one.  Here  there  is  no  gradual  j  St.  Paul,  or  even  that  of  the  Epistle  to 
transition,  but  a  sudden  spring  ;  a  remark, 
which  is  calculated  to  lead  us  to  a  recoir- 
nition  of  the  peculiar  activity  of  the  Di- 
vine  Spirit  in  the  souls  of  the  apostles. 


quae  substantiatn  continet  corporalem,  qua  semper 
ill  subsUntia  corporis  salva  est.)  See  ^rt^i  oe^x-  '• 
ii.  c.  10,  c.  Ccl3.  iv.  57. 

*  Origen,  -n-.  i^.  I.  ii.  c.  3,  c.  Cela.  iv.  c.  69, 
He  savs  merely,  (i  //«t»  rcr  at>xnrf^'.i  tuc  Ktiux( 

ycuuim  X'.ya:  ti  Tcttjr*  iitrurb>mTiu.  There  is 
an  obscure  expression  in  MaU.  f.  402.  to  this  ef- 
fect, "After  the  aT-.K^rx^TiTK  is  fulfilled  in  certain 
JEoas,  TTsLKn  oaax  d^X"" 


the  Hebrews,  and  who  indulged  himsell  m 
such  interpretations  in  a  silly  manner. 
We  cannot  at  all  find  in  this  epistle  that 
view  of  the  Mosaic  ceremonial  law,  as  a 
means  of  religious  education  for  man  in 


•  'F.TiTroKx  Kii'Mitx,  that  is  to  say,  an  epistle 
ijeneral  in  its  (lesiinntioii  and  contents,  an  horta- 
tory piece,  destined  for  many  Churches;  a  de- 
scription, which  corresponds  to  the  conleiils  of  lliis 
letter. 

I  oiic  TaptuXjirier:  w«:c  7rg!><j>«TU<f. 

i  [ypielendein,  lileriilly.  play  in?  ;  a  mode  of  in- 
terpretation, which  cauchi  at  fancilul  rosi'tnblaacos, 
(Sec,  and  plays  on  words  &c. — H.  J.  R.] 


408 


LETTER  OP  BARNABAS,  NOT  GENUINE. 


a  certain  stage  of  his  development,  which 
we  perceive  in  Paul ;  but  such  a  view,  as 
gives  evidence  altogether  of  an  Alex- 
andrian turn  of  mind,  such  a  view  as 
does  not  meet  us  again  in  the  later  Fa- 
thers, and  which  proceeds  from  the  most 
extravagant  idealists  among  the  Alexan- 
drian Jews  ;*  "  Moses  spoke  every  thing 
Iti  -rrvivf^ocTtf  that  is  to  say,  he  has  only 
enveloped  general  spiritual  truths  in  a 
symbolical  form ;  but  the  carnal-minded 
Jews,  instead  of  penetrating  into  the 
meaning  of  the  symbols,  had  understood 
every  thing  literally,  and  believed  that 
they  must  obey  it  to  the  letter;  and  thus 
the  whole  ceremonial  religion  had  pro- 
ceeded from  a  misconception  of  the  car- 
nal-minded multitude."  It  is  said,|  that 
an  evil  angel  guided  them  to  this  misun- 
derstanding, just  as  we  find  in  the  Cle- 
mentine, and  other  similar  writings,  the 
supposition  that  the  original  Judaism 
had  been  adulterated  by  foreign  admix- 
tures, introduced  by  evil  spirits.  The 
writer  of  the  epistle  will  not  allow  it  to 
be  true,  that  circumcision  is  a  seal,  or 
token  of  a  covenant;  because,  he  says,  on 
the  contrary,  it  is  found  among  the  Ara- 
bians, the  Syrians,  and  an  idolatrous 
priesthood  (in  Egypt.)  But  he  argues 
that  Abraham,  by  the  circumcision  of  318 
men,  (Gen.  xvii.,  and  xiv.  14,)  had  pre- 
figured the  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  and  makes 
it  out  thus, — IH  (18)  the  beginning  of 
the  name  of  Jesus,  and  T  (300,)  which 
stands  as  the  token  of  the  Cross  ; — an  ex- 
planation founded  on  Greek  letters  and 
numerals,  which  can  only  suit  some  Alex- 
andrian Jew,  unaccustomed  to,  perhaps, 
unacquainted  with,  the  Hebrew  language, 
who  was  only  at  home  in  the  Alexandrian 
translation,  but  certainly  cannot  suit  Bar- 
nabas, who  assuredly  was  not  such  a 
stranger  to  the  Hebrew  lanffuatre,  even  if 


is  directed  against  carnal  Judaism,  and 
carnal  Judaism  in  Christianity.  We  re- 
cognise a  controversy  against  the  latter, 
which  had  extended  its  doctrinal  influence 
even  to  the  views  entertained  of  the  per- 
son of  Christ,  when  in  chap.  xii.  it  is  par- 
ticularly insisted  upon,  that  Christ  is  not 
only  the  son  of  Man,  and  tlie  son  of 
David,  but  also  the  Son  of  God. 

We  find  also  nothing  to  induce  us  to 
believe,  that  the  author  of  the  epistle  was 
desirous  of  being  considered  Barnabas. 
But  since  its  spirit  and  its  mode  of  con- 
ception corresponded  to  the  Alexandrian 
taste,  it  may  have  happened,  that  as  the 
author's  name  was  unknown,  and  persons 
were  desirous  of  giving  it  authority,  a  re- 
port was  spread  abroad  in  Alexandria,  that 
Barnabas  was  its  author. 

After  Barnabas,  we  come  to  Clement, 
perhaps,  the  same  whom  Paul  mentions, 
(Phil.  iv.  3;)  he  was  at  the  end  of  the 
first  century  bishop  of  Rome.  Under 
his  name  we  have  one  epistle  to  the 
Church  of  Corinth,  and  the  fragment  of 
another.  The  first  was  read  in  the  first 
centuries  aloud  at  divine  service  in  many 
Churches,  even  with  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament;  it  contains  an  exhorta- 
tion to  unity,  interwoven  with  examples 
and  general  reflections,  addressed  to  the 
Church  at  Corinth,  which  was  shaken  by 
divisions.  This  letter,  although,  on  the 
whole,  genuine,  is,  nevertheless,  not  free 
from  important  interpolations ;  e.  g.  a. 
contradiction  is  apparent,  since  through- 
out the  whole  epistle  we  perceive  the 
simple  relations  of  the  earliest  forms  of  a 
Christian  Church,  as  the  bisliops  and 
presbyters  are  always  put  upon  an 
equality,  and  yet  in  one  passage  (§  40 
and  following)  the  whole  system  of  t!ie 
Jewish  priesthood  is  transferred  to  the 
Christian  Church.     The  second    epistle. 


o  . <r>""o^->    -•■-"     '•      ^ -"•         '  ■■" 

we  could  attribute  such  a  spiritless  play   as  it  is  called,  is  evidently  only  the  frag- 


on  words  to  him.  And  yet  the  man, 
who  could  fall  intu  such  trifling,  held  it 
for  something  extraordinary,  and  he  adds 
these  pompous  words,  which  are  charac- 
teristic of  the  mystery-mongering  of  the 
Jewish  Alexandrian  Gnosis:  "No  one 
hath  received  a  more  authentic  doctrine 
from  me,  but  I  know  that  ye  are  worthy 
of  it."J 

The  prevailing  tendency  of  the  epistle 


*  See  page  34.  -f-  c.  9. 

otin  Iti  l^ioi  ta-Ti  iifAw.  [On  the  subject  of  this 
intorpretatian  of  the  number  .318,  the  reader  is  re- 
ferred to  the  Tvev.  S.  R.  Maitland's  "Letter  to  a 
friend  on  the  Tract  for  the  Times,  No.  89,"  1841.] 


ment  of  a  homily. 

Under  the  name  of  this  Clement,  Ivo 
letters  have  besides  been  preserved  in  the 
Syrian  Church,  and  they  were  published 
by  Wetstein  in  an  appendix  to  liis  edition 
of  the  New  Testament.  Tliey  are  two 
circulars,  especially  addressed  to  Chris- 
tian men  and  women  living  in  celibacy. 
It  cannot  be  adduced  as  a  proof  against 
the  Clementine  origin  of  these  epistles, 
that  this  state  of  life  is  held  in  special  es- 
teem in  them,  because  this  iiigli  estima- 
tion of  celibacy  found  admittance  in  early 
time.*    The  high  antiquity  of  these  epis- 


See  Part  11. 


CLEMENTINE    CONSTITUTIONS. 


409 


ties  is  in  some  degree  testified  by  the 
nonappearance  of  any  endeavour  to  sup- 
port tfie  pretensions  of  the  hierarchical 
party  ;  and  by  tiie  circumstances,  that  the 
ideas  of  the  priesthood  belonging  to  the 
Old  Testament  are  not  here  introduced 
into  the  Christian  Church,  as  is  the  case 
in  similar  writings  of  this  kind ;  that 
neither  the  separation  of  the  priesthood 
from  the  laity,  nor  the  distinction  of 
bishops  and  presbyters  occurs  here ;  and 
that  the  gift  of  healing  the  sick,  and 
especially  demoniacs,  is  considered  as  a 
free  gift,  and  not  as  a  gift  belonging  to 
one  peculiar  office.  And  yet  this  is  no 
certain  proof  of  the  high  antiquity  of  the 
epistles ;  because,  even  if  it  were  of 
later  origin,  all  this  might  be  explained 
iioin  the  idiosyncrasy  of  certain  regions 
of  the  East. 

As  these  epistles  must  have  been  ad- 
mirably suited  to  the  ascetic  disposition 
of  the  western  Churches,  especially  the 
North  African,  and  as  in  similar  writings 
of  practical  import  (against  similar  abuses 
to  those  which  are  censured  in  these 
epistles)  occasion  to  make  use  of  them 
must  often  have  arisen,  it  is  the  more  re- 
markable that  they  were  never  quoted  be- 
fore the  fourth  century,*  which  certainly 
must  create  a  suspicion  against  their 
geiniineness. 

These  epistles  altogether  bear  the  cha- 
racter of  havinij  been  counterfeited  in  the 


Stitutions  (JiaTa^nf,  or  iiara'/a*  'AjroaTo- 
>iixai,)  and  the  xaiofj 'A7ro<7TcAiKOi. 

Tlie  siune  thing  may  have  occurred  in 
regard  to  the  origin  of  these  two  collec- 
tions, as  took  place  with  regard  to  the 
origin  of  the  Apostles'  Creed,  as  it  is 
called.  As  it  was  usual  originally  to 
speak  of  an  apostolical  tradition,  without 
its  being  supposed,  that  the  apostles  iiad 
published  a  confession  of  faith  ;  so  in 
the  same  manner,  in  regard  to  the  con- 
stitution and  customs  of  the  Church, 
an  apostolical  tradition  was  spoken  of, 
without  its  beihg  thought  that  tiie  apos- 
tles had  given  laws  in  writing  on  the 
subject.  And  when  people  had  once 
become  used  to  the  expressions,  "•  Apos- 
tolical traditions,"  "  Apostolical  ordi- 
nances," the  pretence,  or  the  belief,  at 
last  attached  itself  to  them,  that  the 
apostles  had  written  down  a  collection 
of  ecclesiastical  laws,  as  they  had  a  con- 
fession of  faith.  And  hence,  under  the 
influence  of  dillerent  interests,  different 
collections  of  this  kind  may  have  existed, 
as  those  which  Epiphanius  quotes  in 
many  places,  are  evidently  not  identical 
with  our  Apostolical  Constitutions.  These 
latter  appear  to  have  arisen  gradually  in 
the  Oriental  Church,  out  of  difli'rent 
pieces,  whose  ages  extend  from  the  latter 
part  of  the  second  to  the  fourth  century. 

Hennas  would  follow  here,  if  he,  as 
many  of  the  ancients  thought,  were  tlu 


latter  years  of  the  second,  or  in  the  third    same  with  the  Ilermas  mentioned  in  the 


century,  partly  in  order  to  enhance  the 
value  of  celibacy,  partly  in  order  to 
counteract  the  abuses  which  rose  up 
under  the  cover  of  a  life  of  celibacy, 
especially  the  introduction  of  the  avma-- 
axroi.j-     (See  above.) 

Many  writings  were  counterfeited  under 
the  name  of  this  Clement,  to  serve  a 
hierarchical  or  a  doctrinal  purpose;  such, 
for  instance,  are  the  writings  which  relate 
the  history  of  Clement  himself,  who  is 
supposed    there  to   be  converted   by  the 


16lh  cliaptcr  of  the  epistle  of  the  Apostle 
Paid  to  the  Romans.  We  have  a  work 
under  his  name,  which  bears  the  title  of 
the  Sliepherd  (7ro»/A»)»,)  so  called,  because 
in  the  second  book,  an  angel  is  repre- 
sented as  a  shepherd,  to  whose  guidance 
Hermas  is  entrusted. 

It  cannot  be  ascertained  with  certainty, 
whether  the  antlior  really  believed  that 
he  had  the  visions,  which  he  represents, 
or  whether  he  suppo.-;ed  them,  in  order  to 
gain  a  more  readv  entrance  for  the  doc- 


Apostle  Peter,  and  meets  again  with  his  ■  trines,  especially  those  of  a  practical 
fatlier,  whom  he  had  lost,;^: — the  Clemen-  \  kind,  inculcated  by  him.  The  work  was 
tine,  the  peculiar  Ebionitish  cliaracter  |  originally  written  in  Greek,  but  it  is  pre- 
of  which  we  have  before  remarked, — as  j  served  to  us  in  great  measure,  only  in  a 
wellas  the  collection  of  the  Apostolic  Con-   Latin    translation;   and    it    was    held    in 

-  great  reverence  by  Greek  writers  of  the 
second  centurv,  to  which  the  name  of 
Hernias  and  the  renowned  visions  may 
have  deeply  contributed.  Irenams  quotes 
the  book  under  the  name  of  "  the  Scrip- 
ture :"  and  vet  there  are  strong  reasons 
to  doubt  of  its  being  derived  from  that 
Apostolic  IlermaH,  although  thf  other 
tradition,  (supported  by  the  poenj  against 


*  The  first  traces  of  them  are  in  Epiphanius 
and  .leroine. 

j  Tfiis  almse  had  spread  it-stlf  in  the  Antiochian 
Church,  as  well  as  in  the  North  African.  See  the 
Synodal  P>pistle  against  Paul  of  Samosata.  Eu- 
scb.  vii.  30. 

:f  Hence  comes  the  name  of  the  edition  of  this 
work,  preserved  to  us  in  the  translalion  of  Kuf- 
finus, — uvuyvit^ii-fy.oi,  Kecognitioncs. 


410  APOLOGISTS. — aUADRATUS,  ARISTIDES,  JUSTIN   MARTYR. 

Marcion  nscribed  to  Tertullian,  and  the  I  against  it  by  false  reports,  and  they  used 
fragment  on  the  canon  of  the  New  Tes- 1  their  comprehensive  and  scientific  educa- 
tament  published  by  Miiratori,)*  that  the  j  tion  and  knowledge  in  order  to  represent 
brother  of  the  Roman  Bishop  Pius,  who]  the  Christian  doctrine  to  the  more  ciilti- 
obtained  this  office  about  the  year  1-56,  |  vated  heathens  in  a  point  of  view  more 
was  the  author,  is  also  very  doubtful,  be-  [  agreeable  to  their  turn  of  mind, 
cause  we  cannot  determine  what  credit  is  |  Among  these  we  must  first  name  Qua- 
due   to  these  two  writings,  and  because  !  dratus,  who  was  known  as  an  evangelist,* 


the  high  reverence  entertained  for  the 
book  in  the  time  of  an  Irenoeus  and  a 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  can  hardly  be  re- 
conciled with  so  late  an  origin  of  the 
work.t 

Ignatius,  bishop  of  the  Church  at 
Aniioch,  in  the  time  of  the  Emperor 
Trajan,  it  would  appear,  was  carried  as 
prisoner  to  Rome,  where  he  expected  to 
be  exposed  to  wild  beasts.  On  the  jour- 
ney, it  would  seem  he  wrote  seven  epis- 
tles, six  to  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor, 
and  one  to  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna. 
Certainly,  these  epistles  contain  passages 
which  at  least  bear  completely  upon 
them  the  character  of  antiquity.  This  is 
particularly  the  case  with  the  passages 
directed  against  Judaism  and  Docetism  ; 
but  even  the  shorter  and  more  trust- 
worthy edition  is  very  much  interpolated. 

The  epistle  to  Polycarp,  the  bishop  of 
Smyrna,  appears  the  most  like  a  diligent 
compilation ;  and  that  to  the  Church  of 
Rome  bears,  the  most,  the  stamp  of  indi- 
viduality upon  it. 

We  have  already  spoken  before  of  Po- 
lycarp, bishop  of  Smyrna.  An  epistle  to 
the  Church  at  Philippi  is  ascribed  to  him, 
the  genuineness  of  which  there  are  no 
sufficient  grounds  to  deny. 

We  shall  now,  after  considering  the 
apostolic  Fathers,  notice  the  Apologists, 
who  follow  immediately  after  them  in 
chronological  order.  The  defence  of 
Christianity  against  the  heathens  first  led 
the  way  to  an  union  between  Christianity 
and  the  knowledge  and  cultivation  of 
those  days.  As  ur.der  the  government  of 
Hadrian,  Christianity  began  to  extend 
itself  more  among  the  more  cultivated 
classes,  as  heathens  of  a  certain  philo- 
sophical and  literary  character  came  over  L 

to  the  Christian  Church,  they  felt  them-  I  *  We  must  understand  this  word  in  a  sense 
selves  obliged  to  defend  their  faith  aaainst'  agreeable  to  the  New  Testament,  i.  e.  a  teacher, 
the  accusations  whicli  were  spread  abroad  :  not  appointed  to   one  particular  Church,  but 

I  a  missionary  travelling  for  the  purpose  of  propa- 


and  celebrated  for  his  prophetic  gifts.  We 
must  not  confound  him,  as  Jerome  has 
done,  with  a  Quadratus  who  was  bishop 
of  a  Church  at  Athens  in  the  days  of 
Marcus  Aurelius.  His  Apology, alas!  has 
not  reached  us,  and  Eusebius  has  pre- 
served to  us  only  the  following  remark- 
able words:  "The  works  of  our  Saviour 
were  always  present,  because  they  Avere 
real  and  true ;  those  who  were  healed  by 
him ;  those,  who  were  raised  from  the 
dead,  who  were  to  be  seen,  not  only  when 
they  were  being  healed  and  raised,  but 
constantly ;  not  only  during  the  lifetime 
of  our  Saviour,  but  after  his  departure 
they  were  present  a  considerable  time,  so 
that  some  of  them  have  reached  even  to 
our  time."f 

The  second  Apologist,  Aristides,  even 
as  a  Christian,  still  retained  the  gown  of 
the  philosopher,  (tjjj/3«i/,)  in  order  to  be 
able  to  represent  Christianity  to  the 
educated  classes  as  the  new  heavenly 
philosophy.'^ 

Justin  Martyr  is  remarkable,  as  the  first 
among  these  apologists  whose  writings 
have  reached  us,  and  as  the  first  of  those 
better  known  to  us,  who  became  a  teacher 
of  the  Christian  Church,  in  whom  we  ob- 
serve an  approximation  between  Chris- 
tianity and  the  Grecian,  but  especially  the 
Platonic  philosophy ;  and  in  this  respect 
he  may  be  considered  as  the  precursor  of 
the  Alexandrian  Fathers.  We  can  obtain, 
for  the  most  part,  only  from  his  own 
writings  any  account  of  his  life  aiul  edu- 
cation \  and  here  also  we  feel  most  cer- 
tainty at  first,  by  restricting  ourselves  to 
his  two  Apologies,  because  these  are  the 
undoubted  work  of  Justin,  and  bear  upon 
them  the  stamp  of  a  peculiar  character  of 
mind  which  cannot  be  mistaken  :  and  the 


Murat.  Antiq.  Ital.  Jud.  ^vi, 
•}■  It  may  be  the  case,  that  the  Roman  Bishop 


gating  the  Gospel. 

■}-  Euscb.  iii.  37;    iv.  3;    v.  17. 

\  Hieronym.  dc  Vir.  lUust.  c.  20.  Ep.  83,  ad  Mag. 


rius  really  had  a  brother  of  this  name;  and  tbat  |  num:    apologeticum   context um  phikmphoruui 

destroy  the  fev  "       ■■—•■'■ 

very  purpose 


those,  who  wished  to  destroy  the  feveretice  paid  1  sentcntiis.     The  traveller  de  la  Guilletiere  says, 
to  this  work,  lor  that  very  purpose  assigned  to  [  that  in  a  convent  about  six  miles  from  Athens 


it  so  late  an  author. 


they  profess  to  have  a  copy  of  this  Apology. 


JUSTIN    MARTYR. 


rest  of  his  writings,  on  the  contrary,  must  | 
in  the  first  place  prove  their  genuineness  ] 
by  a  comparison  with  these.  I 

Fliivius  Justiiius  was  born  in  the  town 
Flavia  Neapolis,  formerly  Siciiem,  in  ] 
Samaria;  it  was  then  a  Roman-Greek  co- i 
lony,  in  wfiich  tlie  Greek  hmguftge  pre-  i 
vailed.  It  was,  probably,  not  a  pretlomi-  I 
nantly  speculative  character  of  mind,  | 
which  was  not  the  case  with  him,  but  an 
endeavour  after  a  satisfactory  religious 
persuasion,  which  led  him,  as  well  as  so 
many  others  of  those  days,  to  the  study 
of  philosophy;  and  for  this  very  reason, 
the  Platonic  philosophy  would  have  pe- 
culiar attractions  for  him.  Since  it  was 
rather  a  religious  than  a  speculative 
interest  which  led  him  on,  it  is  possible, 
although  some  isolated  and  elevated  Pla-  j 
tonic  notions,  like  those  of  the  relation-  j 
ship  of  the  human  soul  to  God,  and  of  j 
the  intuition  of  Divine  tilings,  animated  i 
him,  tiiat  he  was  not  so  taken  by  the  sys- 
tem of  the  school,  that  his  heart  should  : 
thence  become  incapable  of  those  higher  | 
impressions,  which  passed  the  bounds  of  [ 
the  empire  of  this  system.  How  he  be- 
came a  Christian  he  relates  himself:* 
"  While  I  still  found  my  delight  in  the 
doctrines  of  Plato,  and  heard  the  Chris- 
tians calumniated,  but  yet  saw  them  fear- 
less towards  death,  and  all  that  men 
account  fearful ;  I  learned  tliat  it  was  im- 
possible, tliat  they  should  live  in  sin  and 
lust.t  I  despised  the  opinion  of  the 
niuliitude;  I  was  proud  of  being  a  Chris- 
tian, and  1  endeavoured  with  all  my 
powers  to  remain  one." 

Justin  retained  as  a  Christian,  the  phi- 
losopher's cloak.J  which  he  had  borne  as 
a  lieathen  philosopher  and  ascetic  ;  and 
he  used  this  garb  and  mode  of  life,  in 
order  easily  to  be  al)le  to  introduce  con- 
versations on  religions  and  piiilosophical 
subjects,  and  thus  to  prepare  a  passage 
for  the  Gospel  into  the  hearts  of  men ; 
and  he  was,  as  it  were,  a  travelling 
evangelist  in  the  philosophic  garb.^  It 
lias   been  unsoundly  concluded||  that  he 


*  Apolog.  i.  p.  50-1. 

t  See  Part  I.  i  See  Part  II. 

§  Even  if  the  Diahn^us  cum  Tnjplume  were 
not  genuine,  we  might,  nevertheless,  use  the  ac- 
count given  in  it;  for  we  iriight  presuppose  that 
the  author  of  it  had  an  accurate  knowledge  of 
Justin's  life. 

|l  By  Tillemont,  ['i'he  conclusion  of  Tille- 
mont  may  be  unwarranted  by  the  expression  of 
Justin,  but  surely  at  that  time  there  was  a  separa- 
tion of  clergy  and  laity.  See  note,  p.  102. — H. 
J.  fi.] 


411 

was  ordained  to  the  priesthood,  from  hij 
own  language  in  iiis  representation  of  llie 
Christian  laith  in  the  second  Apology, 
»■'  We  conduct  the  convert,  after  we  have 
baptized  him,  to  the  assembled  brethren." 
There  was  at  that  time  no  such  separation 
of  the  clergy  from  the  laity,  tiiat  Justin 
migiit  not  have  been  al)le  to  say  this  from 
his  position,  as  sharing  the  priesthood 
common  to  all  Christians.  But  whetiier 
he  was  solemnly  ordained  to  the  calling 
of  an  evangelist  in  the  name  of  the 
Church  or  not — an  inquiry  of  no  import- 
ance— it  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that  his 
gifts  were  left  idle,  whether  for  the  propa- 
gation of  the  Gospel  among  the  heathen, 
or  for  the  instruction  of  the  Churches 
themselves.  Jf  the  account  of  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Justin  were  worthy  of  credit, 
it  would  prove,  that  when  he  was  resident 
in  Rome,  a  part  of  the  Ciiurch,  which 
understood  the  Greek  language,  used  to 
assemble  in  his  house,  in  order  to  hear 
his  discourses. 

We  observed  in  the  first  part  of  this 
history,*  that  after  the  death  of  the  Em- 
peror Hadrian,  persecutions  arose  against 
the  Christians  in  the  beginning  of  tlie 
reign  of  Antoninus  Pius.  Thereby  Justin, 
who  was  then  resident  at  Home,  was  in- 
duced to  address  a  writing  in  defence  of 
the  interests  of  the  Christians  to  the  em- 
peror. Since,  however,  in  the  superscrip- 
tion of  this  work,  he  does  not  give  the 
title  of  C.Bsar  to  .M.  Aurelius,  it  is  probably 
to  be  inferred,  that  it  was  written  before 
his  adoption  into  that  dignity,  which  took 
place  A.  D.  139.t 

•  Sec  page  60. 

■\  The  superscription  is  AiT-,Kg<Tcg/  T<t»  Wkx* 
'Ai^tnvui  'AvT6v<irai  Eia-s^u  lijiirrm  KMnp  x.-u  O'j-m 
fi77iuui  ulai  <^tK(/T'j^oi  X.-JJ  Aii/Jtw  .^/xo3";jai  (according 
to  Euscbius  <fiKCT;^yj)  KaiJ-<g->:  <fi/5-ti  ulte  Kti  Hv7f- 

Sn/Ate  TavTi  'Vuujuui-  The  first  n  imed  is  Augustus 
Antoninus  Pius,  who  had  then  entered  on  his 
reign,  the  second  M.  Antuninus,  [)hilosi)phus,  to 
whom  the  Emperor  Hadrian  (in  coni()liance  with 
whose  wishes  Antoniims  Pius  adopted  him)  had 
given  the  name  Annius  Vcrissimus,  the  third  is 
Lueius  Verus  Antoninus,  afterwards  the  associate 
of  M.  Aurelius  in  the  government,  the  son  of 
Lucius -Elius  Verus,  whom  Il.idrian  had  adopted 
and  nominated  as  Cxsar ;  after  the  early  death  of 
the  latter,  he  (the  son.)  as  Hadrian  wished,  was 
ado|)tcd  in  the  same  manner  by  .Antoninus  Pius, 
who  had  stepped  into  the  place  of  4iis  father,  'i'he 
reading  found  in  Eusebius  is  most  likely  the  trus 
one,  for  it  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that  Lucius 
Verus  should  have  had  two  epithets.  The  name 
of  Philosopher  is  utterly  out  of  character  for  a  boy 
of  nine  years  of  age,  who  might  yet  very  well  bo 
called  f§i3-Tv  mtiu-Ji':.  It  is  more  likely  liiat  the 
nauio  oi  Philosopher  should  have  been  given  to 


412 


THE    FIRST   APOLOGY. 


There  are  greater  difficulties  in  the  de- 
termination of  the  time,  at  which  the  first 
Apology,  as  it  is  called,  was  written. 
The  occasion,  which  moved  him  to  write 
for  the  Christians  (an  occasion  full  of  in- 
struction, with  regard  both  to  the  history 
of  tiie  active  efficacy  of  Christianity,  and 
to  that  of  the  persecutions)  was  this, — a 
woman  in  Rome,  who  had  led  a  vicious 
life  with  her  husband,  was  converted,  and 
refusing  any  longer  to  share  the  vices  of 
her  husband  endeavoured  to  bring  about 
his  reformation.  As,  however,  she  was 
unable  to  efl'ect  this,  and  was  unable, 
if  she  remained  any  longer  in  union 
with  her  husband,  to  withdraw  herself 
from  participation  in  his  sins,  and  as 
she  had,  according  to  the  doctrines  of 
our  Lord,  grounds  sufficient  to  justify  a 
.separation,  she  separated  herself  from 
him.  In  order  to  revenge  himself,  the 
divorced  husband  accused  her  as  a  Chris- 
tian. The  accused  woman  presented  a 
petition  to  the  emperor,  that  she  might  be 
allowed  first  to  arrange  her  family  con- 
cerns, and  then  she  was  willing  to  under- 
go her  judicial  trial.  When  her  husband 
found  his  revenge  against  his  wife  thus 
delayed,  he  turned  his  rage  against  her 
instructor  in  Christianity,  named  Ptole- 
niffius.  He  was  arrested  by  a  centurion, 
and  carried  before  the  Procfectus  urbis. 
As  he  openly  declared  before  him,  that  he 
was  a  Christian,  he  was  condemned  to 
death.  Another  Christian,  by  name  Lu- 
cius, who  heard  this  sentence,  said  to  the 
Prrefect,  "  Wherefore  have  you  sentenced 
to  death  this  man,  who  has  committed 
no  murder,  no  theft,  no  adultery;  but 
only  because  he  is  a  Christian .'  You  are 
acting  in  a  manner,  which  is  not  becoming 
either  to  the  pious  emperor,  or  the  philo- 
sopher tiie  son  of  the  emperor.''*  The 
Prefect  concluded  from  this  declaration 
that  he  was  a  Christian,  and  when  he 
confirmed  this,  the  Prefect  sentenced  him 
in  like  manner  to  death.  A  third  person 
shared  the  same  fate. 

The  question  is,  therefore,  Whether 
this  event  suits  best  with  the  reign  of 
Antoninus  Pius,  or  that  of  M.  Aurelius? 
We  find  here  nothing  that  would  be  ahi^o- 
lulchj  inconsistent  with  the  former;  for, 


iElius  Verus,  who  was  dead,  whom  Spartianus 
calls  "  eruditus  in  Uteris." 

(according  to  Eiischius  the  common  rcadinir  is 
<|!iA'.3-cocu.)  [N.  B.  This  expression  is  ambiguous, 
— the  meaning  is,  that  Eusebius  reads  (fixc<rc^a>, 
and  the  common  editions  of  Justin  read  !t>iM3-i<fov. 
•Sec  the  note  of  Valesius. — H.  J.  R.] 


as  Ave  remarked,*  the  law  of  Trajan  was 
by  no  means  abolished  by  the  rescripts 
of  Hadrian  and  of  Antoninus  Pius,  ia 
accordance  with  which  law,  the  open 
avowal  of  Christianity  might  be  punished 
with  death,  although  the  mildness  of  the 


emperor  permitted  a  governor  favourably        I 


disposed  to  Christians,  to  pass  over  a 
great  deal.  But  is  it  probable  that  a 
Christian  should  have  spoken  thus  to  the 
Praifect,  if  the  reigning  emperor  had  him- 
self issued  a  severe  law  against  the  Chris- 
tians, as  Christians .?  Even  in  the  Apology 
itself,  there  is  no  trace  of  the  existence 
of  a  new  law  against  the  Christians,  for 
the  abolition  of  which  Justin  entreated 
the  emperor.  It  may  be  said,  that  it  suits 
only  the  time  of  M.  Aurelius;  for  Justin 
says,  that  confessions  had  been  extorted 
from  the  servants,  women,  and  children 
of  the  Christians,  by  which  the  popular 
reports  about  unnatural  practices  in  the 
assemblies  of  Christians  were  declared  to 
be  true.  It  is  certainlyj"  in  the  reign  of 
M.  Aurelius  that  we  first  find  examples 
of  such  conduct  towards  the  Christians 
quoted ;  but  as  popular  fanaticism  had,  ever 
since  the  reign  of  Nero,  spread  abroad 
such  reports  against  the  Christians,  that 
fanaticism  may  easily  have  found  at  an 
earlier  time  many  magistrates  who  gave 
credit  to  it,  and  ministered  to  it.  Even 
in  the  Apology,  which  according  to  the 
common  supposition  is  placed  in  the  time 
of  Antoninus  Pius,  Justin  at  Uiat  time  is 
anxious,  that  people  would  only  not  give 
credit  to  tlie  blind  reports  of  the  people 
against  Christians.  But  he  says,  that  the 
same  things  which  happened  at  Rome  un- 
der Urbicus,  commonly  took  place  else- 
where also;  that  the  other  Governors 
acted  as  unreasonably  ;  that  every  wiiere, 
if  any  one  was  improved  by  Christianity, 
one  of  his  nearest  relations  or  friends 
came  forward  as  his  accuser;  and  this 
seems  to  agree  better  with  the  general 
persecutions  under  W.  Aurelius.  But 
even  in  the  time  of  Antoninus  Pius,  many 
violent  popular  assaults  liad  taken  place 
against  the  Christians,  which  moved  him 
to  issue  the  rescript,  which  was  calculated 
to  allay  the  irritations  of  men's  minds. 
This  is  also  still  farther  remarkable  iu 
the  above  quoted  designation  of  the  reign- 
ing princes  through  Lucius,  that  the  title 
of  philosopher,  peculiarly  appropriated  to 
M.  Aurelius,  is  not  bestowed  upon  him, 
but  transferred  to  Verus,  whom  it  does 
not  suit,  and  to  whom  it  is  not  elsewhere 


See  Section  I. 


■f  See  Section  I. 


VIEWS    ON   THE  LOGOS. 


413 


attributed,  while  the  title  of  Antoninus 
Pius  is  bestowed  upon  M.  Aurelius,  who 
is  no  where  spoken  of  during  his  lifetime 
by  this  name.  Even  if  we  throw  away 
the  reading  of  Eusebius  we  have  quoted, 
the  dithculty  is  not  removed,  for  the  same 
titles  are  attributed  at  the  end  of  the 
Apology  to  both  the  emperors.*  These 
grounds  are  an  argument  to  place  this 
Apology,  not  according  to  the  common 
belief,  which  has,  however,  great  names, 
e.  g.  Pagi,  Tillemont,  Mosheim,  in  its 
favour,  but  with  Valesius  and  Longuerue 
in  the  time  of  Antoninus  Pius. 

It  is  also  a  striking  circumstance,|  that 
Justin,  twicet  in  this  Apology,  appeals  to 
thai,  which  he  has  before  said.,  which  yet 
does  not  occur  in  this  Apology,  but  in 
the  first.  He  uses  the  same  formula,  ij 
7rpoi!p»i,u,£»,  which  he  uses  in  other  places, 
wiiere  he  quotes  passages  out  of  the  same 
writing. 

We  do  not,  however,  wish  to  deny, 
that  the  authority  of  Eusebius  is  opposed 
to  our  supposition,  because  he  certainly 
appears  to  consider  the  first  mentioned 
Apology  as  written  in  the  reign  of  Anto- 
ninus Pius,  and  to  place  the  second  in 
that  of  .M.  Aurelius  ;§  but  still  the  authority 
of  this  historian  is  not  decisive  here,  for 
the  proper  relation  of  the  second  Apology, 
as  it  is  called,  to  the  first,  might  be  lost 
and  forgotten  in  the  time  of  Eusebius. 

An  idea,  which  afterwards  re-appears 
among  the  Alexandrians,  is  altogether 
peculiar  to  these  two  treatises;  namely, 
that  in  Christianity  there  is  to  be  found 
the  unclouded  and  unbroken  revelation 
of  Divine  truth,  while  on  the  contrary,  in 
all  human  systems,  there  are  only  to  be 
found  fragments  of  a  revelation  of  truth, 
clouded  through  the  partial  views  of  man. 
What  Clement  says  of  the  revelation  of 


•  Ew  ouv  X.CU  iifj^a-t  ii^ictii  vj^i^uii;  kh  '^i\(,T'j<pi!t!  Tat 
SiK-xiA  'uTTi^  iMjTm  KpivAi.  That  in  the  beginning  of 
the  Apology  of  Athenagoras  the  title  ^/xctj^oc  is 
attributed,  whether  it  be  to  L.  Verus,  or  to  Corn- 
modus,  cannot  be  alleged  to  remove  thisdiflicuity, 
because  it  is  easy  to  understand  that  the  titles, 
properly  belonging  only  to  one  emperor,  should 
be  attributed  to  two  in  common,  as  is  the  case 
here. 

f  As  the  Benedictine  Editor  has  already  ob- 
served. 

i  In  the  Benedictine  Edition,  §  4,  where  he 
speaks  of  the  enmity  with  God  ;  §  G,  where  he 
speaks  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos ;  and  §  8 
where  he  speaks  of  lleraclitus. 

§  If  we  compare  ii.  13,  and  iv.  16,  (for  iy.  II, 
is  somewhat  otiscure,)  and  ch.  17,  with  the  pre- 
ceding, we  cannot  doubt,  that  either  the  reading 
TreoTipx  is  faulty,  or  that  Eusebius  himself  has 
only  written  thus  from  some  oversight. 


'  the  Logos,  torn  in  pieces  like  the  body 
of  Dionysius   (see  above.)   had    already 
been  said  by  Justin  in  other  words,     llo 
j  supf)osL's  that  there  is  in  human   nature 
something    akin*   to   the  Divine    Logos, 
!  that  universal  and  absolute   Divine  rca- 
,  son,  from  wliicli  the  partial  recognition 
I  of  religious  and  moral  truth  in  the  hea- 
then philosophers  proceeded.     The  reve- 
lation, however,  of  truth,  wiiich    iiere  is 
in  broken  fragments,  and  is  disturbed  by 
the  intermi.xture  of  what  is  human,  was 
!  first  shown  in  its  clearness  and  perfection, 
j  by  the  appearance  of  the  Logos  itself  in 
human  nature.    The  same  relation  which 
exists  between  it  and  the  clouded,  partial 
reason  of  man,  exists  also  between  Chris- 
I  tianity  and  all  other  systems  of  religious 
I  truth.     Certainly,  this  was  an  idea,  ex- 
!  tremely  calculated  to  seek  for  points  in 
the  common  religious  conscience  of  man, 
for  Christianity  to  attach  itself  upon,  as 
well  as  to  set  forth  the  elevation  of  the 
Gospel  above  all  previous  systems  con- 
taining religious  matter.   He  hence  says,f 
that  all  good,  which  has  ever  been  spoken 
by   any,   belongs    to   Christianity.      He 
hence  concludes,  that  in  all  times  those 
who  have  followed  the  inward  revelation 
of  the  Logos,  and   lived  in  accordance 
with  it,  were  Christians;  although  they 
were  called  Atheists,  as  Abraham  and  So- 
crates, and  that  such   men  were  always 
persecuted  by  the  enemies  of  the  Logos 
(those   who  live   without  reason.)     We 
certainly  need  not   suppose    that  Justin 
delivered  these  notions  at  Alexandria,  and 
that  they  have  passed  from  him  to   the 
Alexandrian    Fathers,    or   on    the    other 
hand,  that  Justin  has  borrowed  them  from 
a   previously-existing  Alexandrian  theo- 
logy. For  certainly,  every  Platonist, — ac- 
customed to  the  ideas  of  the  relation  of 
the  iroigo>  in  man  to  the  supreme  tout, — 
I  who  was  converted  to  Christianity,  while 
I  he  was  seeking  for  some  medium  between 
'  his  former  Platonic  notions  and  his  newly 
I  acquired  Christian  ones,  might  easily  be 
led  to  these  notions. 

But  it  is,  indeed,  remarkable,  that  in  the 
other  writings  of  Justin,  we  find  no  trace 
of  the  notions,  which  prevail  so  com- 
pletely in  the  Apologies,  as  to  the  relation 
between  that  which  is  divine  in  man  to 
the  self-revelation  of  the  Divine  Logos, 


•    The  cntpudLT'.u  yryM,  OT  the  xc^ec  anfudLTuux. 

\  Apolog.  li.  (commonly  called  i.)  'Orx  tm* 
TTifTt  kx^m:  fi^xTi/,  ></itay  Toi»  X^iTTHtat  Wrt.      [In 
Grabe's  Edition  [Oxford.  8vo.  1700—1703,]  this 
is  printed  as  the  second  .\pology.] 
2M2 


414 


Aoyoj  fffo?  EXXtjm?. 


and  the  notions  that  are  connected  with 
these ;  namely,  in  regard  to  the  relation 
between  tlie  scattered  traces  of  truth 
found  amongthe  heathen  and  Christianity. 
It  may,  indeed,  be  said,  that  he  has  attri- 
buted these  notions  to  himself  only  in 
furtherance  of  his  object,  that  by  this 
means  he  might  dispose  the  philosophical 
emperor  to  be  favourable  to  his  propo- 
sals ;  but  this  is,  nevertheless,  not  a 
natural  supposition.  We  may  especially 
remark,  that  judging  of  Justin  from  his 
writings,  we  can  hardly  give  him  credit 
for  the  adroitness  of  moving  so  freely  in 
a  circle  of  ideas,  taken  up  by  him  in  ap- 
pearance only.  And  besides,  in  his  Apo- 
logies he  makes  no  scruple  of  blaming 
the  religious  doctrines  of  the  Stoics,  al- 
though the  stoicism  of  M.  Aurelius  was 
well  known.  We  may  thence  conclude, 
that  he  pretended  also  to  no  milder 
opinion  of  the  Grecian  philosophy  in 
general,  than  he  really  held.  And  in  other 
writings  also,  intended  to  facilitate  the 
conversion  of  the  heathen,  he  might  just 
as  well  have  used  this  method,  as  in  the 
Apologies.  Why,  therefore,  does  he  never 
use  it  in  those  other  writings  ?  This  cir- 
cumstance would  be  still  more  striking, 
if  we  suppose,  according  to  the  common 
view  of  the  matter,  that  Justin  wrote  these 
Apologies  at  such  different  times. 

We  have  under  the  name  of  Justin  a 
treatise,  with  the  title  of  "An  exhortation 
to  the  heathen"  {'n-et^ainTiKoq  Trfo?  'E^^*J- 
*«s,)  the  object  of  which  is,  to  persuade 
the  heathen  of  the  unsatisfactory  nature 
of  their  popular  religion,  and  their  philo- 
sophical doctrines  of  religion,  as  well  as 
of  the  necessity  of  some  higher  and  Divine 
instruction.  It  is,  most  probably,  the  same 
writing  as  that  which  is  quoted  by  Euse- 
bius  and  Pliotius,  under  the  tide  of  "The 
Confutation"  {i>,£yx,o<;^)  which  suits  its 
contents  well  enough. 

In  this  treatise  we  find  no  trace  of  that 
mild  and  liberal  thought,  which  we  re- 
mark in  the  Apologies,  and  no  trace  of 
that  peculiar  circle  of  ideas,  but  far  rather 
a  contrary  mode  of  thinking.  All  know- 
ledge of  God  is  here  deduced  from  out- 
ward revelation  only;  but  there  were 
many  misunderstood  accordances  with 
truth,  recognised  among  the  heathen;  but 
these  are  all  deduced  from  a  misunder- 
stood and  (dlsified  tradition,  according  to 
the  Jndaeo-Alexandi-ian  notion,  that  a 
knowledge  of  the  doctrines  communicated 
to  the  Jews  by  Divine  revelation,  was 
conveyed    to    the    Greeks     from    Egypt. 


ledged  to  have  existed  among  the  heathen, 
who,  following  the  revelation  of  the  Xoyo<; 
o-TTff/xaTtxo;,  were  witnesses  of  the  truth 
before  the  appearance  of  Christianity; 
here,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  said  :  "  Your 
teachers  also  are  compelled  to  say  much 
for  us  about  Divine  Providence,  even 
against  their  will,  and  especially  those 
who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  and  have  received 
benefit  from  the  religion  of  Moses  and  his 
ancestors."* 

It  is  impossible  to  suppose,  that  this 
treatise  can  have  proceeded  from  the  same 
cast  of  thought,  as  the  two  Apologies  of 
Justin.  But  if  it  is  determined  to  attribute 
it  to  him,  then  we  must  at  least  not  con- 
sider it,  in  accordance  with  the  common 
supposition,  as  the  first  of  his  writings 
after  his  conversion  ;  but  far  rather  as 
one  of  the  later.  We  must  suppose  that 
his  original  more  liberal  and  milder  habits 
of  thought  had  latterly  become  narrower 
and  harsher,  that  the  views  which  ori- 
ginally prevailed  with  him,  and  proceeded 
from  his  own  disposition,  those  views  of 
the  connection  between  the  revelations  of 
the  A070?  c-'jreffjt.a.Tiy.oi  to  the  revelation  of 
the  absolute  Xoyo(;,  which  we  find  as  the 
predominant  views  in  the  Apologies,  were 
latterly  entirely  driven  into  the  back- 
ground by  the  views  imparted  to  him  by 
the  Alexandrian  Jews,  of  outward  Reve- 
lation as  the  source  [of  this  knowledge 
among  the  heathen.]|  Such  a  change  is 
no  doubt  possible,  and  examples  of  such 
changes  are  certainly  to  be  found,  but  one 
is  led  to  inquire  whether  this  treatise  con- 
tains sufficient  evidence  of  the  authorship 
of  Justin,  to  drive  us  to  this  explanation. 
We  have  also  under  the  name  of  Justin 
a  short  address  to  the  heathens  (A070?  w^o? 
'EXArjuac)  which  none  of  the  treatises 
enumerated  in  the  list  of  Justin's  writings 
among  the  ancients  suits,  but  whicli,even 
if  it  does  not  proceed  from  him,  as  the 
style  is  somewhat  more  rhetorical  than 
his,  yet  bears  the  stamp  of  that  time  upon 


»   Cohortat.  p.  15. 

I  It  cannot  be  denied,  that  this  view  occurs 
even  in  the  Apologies,  only  that  it  is  more  in  the 
background,  while  the  other  is  the  predominant 
view.  Apol.  ii.  p.  81.  "  All  which  philosophers 
and  poets  have  said  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul, 
of  the  contemplation  of  Divine  things,  or  of  doc- 
trines like  these,  they  may  have  learnt  and  deve- 
loped, while  they  received  the  first  hints  from  the 
prophets.  '  There  seems,  therefore,  to  be  among 
all  a  Sun  of  truth,  and  it  is  clear,  that  they  havo 
not  understood  it  properly,  because  they  contradict 
themselves."  -       _.      .     .       . 


So  also,  p.  92,  Plato  s  doctrine  of 
While  in  the  Apologies  men  are  acknow-  I  the  Creation  is  deduced  from  Moses. 


DIALOnUS    COM   TRYPHONR. 


415 


it.     It  is  a  rhetorical  exposition  of  the  j 
untenableness   of   the   heathen  doctrines 
about   the  gods,  in  which  the  most  beau- 
tiful part  is  the  conclusion  :  "The  power  j 
of    the  Logos    makes  neither  poets   nor  j 
philosophers,  nor  accomplished  orators; 
but,  wliile  it  forms  us.  it  turns  mortal  men  i 
into  immortal,  mortal  men  into  gods.     It 
lifts  us  from  the  earth  above  the  bounds  I 
of  Olympus.     Come,  suffer  yourselves  to 
be  formed.      Become  as   I   am,  for  I  was 
also   like  you  ;  for  this,  even    the   divine  j 
nature  of  the  doctrines,  the  power  of  the  j 
Logos,  has  overcome  me  ;  for  as  a  skilful  j 
serpent-cliarmer    entices     and     frightens 
away  the  terrible  animal  from  its  lurking- 
place,  so  the  Word   banishes  tlie  terrible 
passions  of  sensuality   out  of  the  most 
hidden  corners  of  the  soul.  And  after  the 
desires   are   banished,  the  soul   becomes 
tranquil  and  cheerful,  and  turns  back  to 
its  Creator,  freed   from   the  evil  that  ad- 
hered to  it." 

We  have  also  under  the  name  of  Justin 
a  treatise  on  the  unity  of  God  (Trepj  /xovap- 
X,i»<;)  containing,  for  the  most  part,  pas- 
sages collected  from  the  ancient  literature 
of  the  Greeks,  especially  from  the  poets. 
The  object  of  the  treatise  is  to  convert 
the  heathen  by  means  of  their  own  litera- 
ture. This  writing  is,  perliaps,  only  the 
fragment  of  a  larger  work,  as  the  work 
which  Eusebius  knew  by  this  name  con- 
tained more,  and  consisted  of  arguments 
for  the  unity  of  God,  taken  partly  from 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  partly  from 
Greek  literature. 

Tlie  greatest  and  most  important  work 
of  Justin's  which  we  possess,  after  his 
JipoJogies^  is  his  Dialogne  with  Trypho 
the  Jew,  the  business  of  which  is  to  prove, 
that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  promised  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  to  confute  the  then 
usual  accusations  of  the  Jews  against 
Christianity.  Justin  meets,  apparently  at 
Ephesus,  with  Trypho  a  Jew,  whom  the 
war,  undertaken  by  Barcliochab,  had 
driven  out  of  Palestine,  and  who  was 
travelling  about  in  Greece,  and  had  there 
studied  the  Grecian  philosophy,  and  was 
much  beloved.  The  garb  of  the  philo- 
sopher, worn  by  Justin,  induces  Trypho 
to  address  him  in  a  retired  walk,  and  a 
conversation  arises  between  them  about 
the  knowledge  of  God,  which  conversa- 
tion Justin  turns  to  Christianity,  and  the 
treatise  consists  of  this  conversation  set 
down  in  writing. 

The  concor(h\nt  testimony  of  antiquity 
assigns  this  piece  to  Justin  ;  tlie  author 
eives  himself  out  as  Justin,  who  wrote 


the  Apologies,  for  he  quotes  a  passage 
from  the  second  (as  it  is  called,)  as  coming 
from  himself.*  The  author  describes 
himself  in  the  Introthiction,  as  one  who 
had  left  Platonism  for  Christianity,  which 
exacdv  suits  Justin.  No  unprejudiced 
man  can  denv  that  the  treatise  unist  have 
been  written  bva  contemporary  of  Justin, 
or  at  least  by  a  man,  the  time  of  whose 
life  approached  nearly  to  that  age ;  now 
one  cannot  imagine  any  reasonai)le  cause, 
why  a  man,  who  could  bear  so  much 
weight  by  his  own  personal  qualities,  as 
Justin  could,  if  we  judge  of  him  from  this 
book,  instead  of  writing  it  in  his  own 
name,  should  have  allowed  this  book  to 
appear  under  the  mask  of  a  contemporary. 
Besides,  we  find  in  this  book  no  trace  of 
the  endeavour,  elsewhere  so  apparent  in 
such  counterfeited  pieces,  to  bring  certain 
favourite  notions  into  vogue.  Its  princi- 
pal feature  is  controversy  against  the  Jews 
and  Judaists,  and  this  coidd  obtain  no 
new  support  with  either  party  by  the 
name  of  the  heathen  from  Samaria,  the 
former  Platonist.f 

The  same  circumstance  will,  perhaps, 
strike  us  here,  as  in  the  above  mentioned 
controversial  treatise  against  the  heathen  ; 
but  the  case  is  altered  here.  We  saw  there 
that  Justin  was  endeavouring  to  show 
on  the  one  hand,  the  aflinity  between 
Christianity  and  the  best  of  Grecian  phi- 
losophy; and  on  the  other,  the  unsatis- 
factoriness  of  the  latter  in  regard  to  reli- 
gion. If,  therefore,  the  former  point  of 
view  was  likely  to  be  most  prominent  in 
the  Apologies  addressed  to  the  philo- 
sopher M.  Aurelius,  it  would  on  the  con- 
trary, be  wholly  suppressed  in  a  treatise 
directed  against  the  Jews,  who  souirht  in 
Grecian  philosophy  a  completion  of  the 
religious  instruction  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. There  appears  also,  nevertheless, 
an  affinity  of  ideas  between  the  Dialogue 
and   the  Apologies,  even  in  the  favourite 


•   S.  Simon  Magus  in  Dial.  Tryph.  349. 

■j-  The  reasons  against  the  genuineness  of  this 
work  are  given  by  Wetstein,  Prolegomrna  in 
Nov.  Test. ;  and  Scmlcr  in  his  FMilion  of  VWu 
stein,  1764.  p.  ITi,  (sec  an  answer  to  Iheir  argu- 
ments from  the  mode  in  which  the  Alexandrian 
version  is  cited,  in  iStroth  Ke[>ertoriuni  lur  hihl. 
und  Morgenhnd.  Literatur.  Bd.  ii.  ^  74.)  and 
I  Koch  in  his  Justini  Martyris  dial,  cum  Tryjihonc 
secundum  regulas  criticas  examinat  et  riK/rt»: 
convietus,  1700  (a  work  winch  I  h.ivo  never 
seen;)  and  Lange  in  the  first  tmok  of  his  History 
of  Ojiinions.  There  is  an  admirable  confutation 
of  them  by  Munschcr.  See  (JommenUtiones 
'J'heolojica;,  Ed.  Rosenmallcr,  Fuldncr  and 
Maurer,  t  i.  pt.  ii. 


RELATION    OF   THE    DIALOGUE    WITH    OTHER   BOOKS. 


416 

notion  of  the  Apologies,  that  of  the  Xoye.<; 
a-vtpjji.oc.riy.ot;.  As  he  says  in  the  first 
Apology,  that  men  would  have  been  able 
to  excuse  themselves  in  tlieir  sins,  if  the 
Auyoq  had  revealed  himself  to  human  na- 
ture, for  the  first  time,  only  an  liundred 
and  fifty  years  ago,  and  if  he  had  not 
bf;en  in  operation  in  all  ages  by  means 
of  the  Xoyo;  crvs^fji.a.rn'.oi;  he  says  the 
same  tfiing  here  in  regard  to  the  natural 
ideas  ((pva-iKxi  Iwomt)  inseparable  from 
liuman  nature,  which  compelled  man  uni- 
versally to  acknowledge  sins  as  sins;  and 
which  might  have  been  extinguished  and 
overwhelmed  rather  than  annihilated  by 
the  operations  of  the  evil  spirit,  and  by 
bad  education,  customs,  and  laws.  What 
lie  here  says  of  that,  which  has  revealed 
itself  in  all  ages,  and  in  accordance  with 
its  own  nature,  as  Good,  by  which  alone 
men  could  please  God,  is  said  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  Ceremonial  Law,  which  was 
only  calculated  as  a  means  of  discipline 
and  education  for  the  hardheartedness  of 
the  Jews;  or  as  a  system  of  typical  pro- 
phecy.* This  leads  us  to  the  idea  of  that 
^eyo?  cTTTEffAaTJxoj,  through  which  a  moral 
conscience  was  given  to  all  mankind. 

There  is,  indeed,  in  the  Apologies  no 
trace  of  Chiliasm  (Millenarianism,)  but 
the  spiritual  ideas  of  eternal  life,  and  of 
the  reign  of  Christ,  which  shine  forth  in 
the  Apologies,  are  by  no  means  contra- 
dictory to  this  doctrine  (see  above ;)  but 
we  must  certainly  consider,  that  the  Chil- 
liasts  themselves,  only  considered  the 
reign  of  a  thousand  years  as  a  point  of 
transition  to  a  higher  grade  of  life.  It 
may  easily  be  explained,  why  he  should 
not  quote  this  doctrine,  which  was  pecu- 
liarly ofl'ensive  to  the  heathens;  because, 
although  important  in  his  estimation,  it 
did  not  belong  to  the  chief  and  funda- 
mental doctrines  of  Christianity,  which 
latter  he  certainly  brought  forward  with- 
out disguise,  even  when  they  were  of- 
fensive to  the  heathens.  In  a  dialogue, 
intended  to  justify  the  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity against  the  reproaches  of  the  Jews, 
he  had,  on  the  contrary,  particular  occa- 
sion to  bring  forward  this  doctrine,  in 
order  to  show  that  Christians  were  ortho- 
dox, even  in  this  point,  according  to  the 
Jewish  notions.  In  both  these  works  an 
anti-Gnostic  and  anti-Marcionitish  spirit 
is  prominent,  on  whicii  Chiliasm  would 
in  those  times  easily  be  engrafted. 

In  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos,  and  the 


xou  S^ytQx.     See  §  ?  p.  247,  264,  320. 


Holy  Spirit,  (see  above,)  there  is  a  striking 
similarity  between  the  Dialogue  and  the 
two  Apologies.  There  are  exhibited  be- 
sides in  thoughts  and  expressions,  which 
occur  in  both  works,  even  more  signifi- 
cant marks  of  the  identity  of  the  author.* 

We  cannot  at  all  determine  with  cer- 
tainty whether  Justin  really  held  such  a 
disputation  with  a  Jew  named  Trypho; 
but  at  least  it  is  most  probable,  that  many 
disputations  with  Jews  gave  him  an  op- 
portunity of  writing  such  a  dialogue,  as 
he  would  by  that  means  have  acquired 
such  an  acquaintance  with  the  Jewish 
theology  of  that  day.  He  was  always 
ready  to  give  a  reason  of  his  failh,  both 
to  Jews  and  to  heathens.  As  we  cannot 
ascertain  what  is  mere  ornament,  and 
what  is  real  fact  in  this  dialogue,  we  can- 
not find  any  sufficient  marks  in  it  for  a 
chronological  decision ;  but  it  is  certain, 
by  the  quotation  from  the  first  Apology, 
that  this  dialogue  was  written  later  than 
that  work,  and  apparently,  from  what  we 
have  above  said,  than  both  the  Apologies. 

Justin  in  this  dialogue  speaks  of  the 
power  of  the  Gospel  from  his  own  expe- 
rience, as  he  does  in  the  Apologies  : 
"  I  found  in  the  doctrines  of  Christ,"  he 
says,  "  the  only  sure  and  saving  phi- 
losophy, for  it  has  in  itself  a  power 
which  commands  reverence,  which  re- 
strains those,  who  depart  from  the  riglit 
path,  and  the  sweetest  tranquillity  is  the 
lot  of  those  who  practise  it.  It  is  clear 
that  this  doctrine  is  sweeter  than  honey, 
because  we  who  have  been  formed  by  it, 
even  to  death,  never  deny  his  name." 

We  have  to  lament  the  loss  of  a  work 
of  Justin  against  all  the  heretical  sects  of 


*  See   the  mystical  explanation  of  the   Mes- 
sianic passage,  Gen.  xlix.  11,  in  Apol.  ii.  74.    "to 

j,ctg   TTAuvci'v  Tuv  a-TiXnv  cLVTiv    iv  stl/ua,rt    a-Td^uKu;" 


KilCZ-UfXlVII 


vTra  Tou 


fis-cy 


TnvjfxajxK 


Six 


TCW     TT^d^llTM 


a-roKn,  a  TTKr'rsuovTtt  uutu)  iia-iv  uvSga'^rc/,  h  cU  i'lK-t 

TO    TTel^ct     Tt'V    ©EiV    <T?rie^fJ.X,     0    KOyCi,    T3     Si    llgh/U'VOV 

cUfxA   T»c  (TTX^uKvii,  (r«/aavTw:v   tcm    ej^eiii  fAii  u'l/uet 

i.XK'  ix.  6iixc  (Tyva^oef.  Compare  with  this  the 
passage  in  Dial.  Tryph.  273,  which  betrays  the 
same  author,  who  only  in  that  passage  made  use 
of  such  expressions,  which  were  rather  borrowed 
from  the  language  of  the  Platonic  philosophy,  as 
his  object  required,  ro  tu  aifxtTi  xbr-.o  i\7ro7rkuyii* 
fxiKKm  'Tov;  '7rt<TTeuovTa.;  ai/TW  iS>ih.cu-  cttixxv  y:!^  ctu- 
Tcv  tK«A.ws  TO  ayi'-jV  Trnv/xu,  tod;  St  xjrcu  uifi^if  u^«g- 
riuv  A«/S:vTsty  h  ci;  oa  Svvity.it  ytf  TTdtfiari  K*t 
i]ixfyai(:  Si  ?ri-i^i^Tou  h  tii  Sstn^ct  aiircu  tth^ouo-i*' 
TO  Si  oi'ifju.  <rTii^u\»f   tlTav  Tov   \c.ycv,  SsJuKoiKiy,  on 


TATIAN. 


417 


his  own  day,  as  well  as  of  his  work  | 
against  Marcion.  It  is  a  matter  of  very  | 
great  doubt,  whether  the  fragment  of  a  { 
work  on  the  resuneclion,  which  John  of 
Damascus,  in  the  eighth  century,  has  im- 
parled to  lis  imder  tlie  name  of  Justin, 
really  belongs  to  him;  Ensebius,  Jerome,  I 
and  Pholius  knew  nothing  of  such  a 
work  by  him. 

Among  the  most  beautiful  remains  of 
Christian  antiquity,  is  a  letter  which  is 
found  among  the  works  of  Justin,  on  the 
characteristics    of    Christian  worship    in 
relation  to  heathenism  and  Christianity. 
It  contains   that   splendid  portraiture  of 
the  Christian  life,  from  which  we  liave 
already  quoted  some  passages.     Its  lan- 
guage and  thoughts,  as  well  as  the  silence  , 
of  the  ancients,  prove  that  the  letter  does  I 
not  proceed  from  Justin.     But  the  Chris- j 
tian  simplicity  which  reigns  in  this  letter  j 
bespeaks    its    high    antiquity,    which    is  I 
farther   supported   by  tliis  circumstance, 
that  the  author  classes  Judaism  and  hea- 
thenism together,  and  does  not  appear  to 
deduce  the  Jewish  cultus  from  a  Divine 
origin,  and  yet  there  is  nothing  properly 
Gnostic  in  the  treatise, — a  phenomenon 
which  could  only  exist  in  a  very  early  age. 

We  cannot,  however,  from  the  author's 
speaking  of  the  sacrifices  of  the  Jews  as 
an  existing  thing,  show  that  he  lived 
before  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  in 
Jerusalem  ;  for  in  a  lively  description  he 
might  very  well  present  in  such  a  manner 
what  really  did  not  exist  any  longer. 
Nor  does  his  calling  himself  the  disciple 
of  the  apostles,  give  us  any  sure  chrono- 
logical mark,  because  he  might  name 
himself  thus  as  a  follower  of  their 
writings  and  doctrines;  even  if  this  pas- 
sage in  the  beginning  of  §  11  really  be- 
longs to  the  genuine  letter. 

The  part  which  follows  it  is  clearly 
from  another  hand ;  that  which  is  there 
said  of  the  Jewish  people,  of  the  Divine 
authority  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  of 
orthodoxy,  which  fixes  itself  on  the  de- 
terminations of  the  Fathers,  by  no  means 
corresponds  with  the  character  of  mind 
and  thought,  which  prevail  in  this  letter. 

Justin,  as  he  himself  says  in  tlie  last 
quoted  Apology,  expected  that  his  death 
would  be  compassed  by  a  person,  from 
one  of  the  then  notorious  classes  of 
hypocritical  professors  of  holiness, — a 
Cynic,  as  he  was  called,  named  Crescens, 
who  was  much  esteemed  by  tiie  people, 
and  excited  them  against  the  Christians ; 
for  he  had  peculiarly  attracted  the  hatred 
of  this  man  to  himself  by  exposing 
53 


his  hypocrisy.  According  to  Eusebius, 
Crescens  really  accomplished  the  pur- 
pose, with  which  he  had  threatened 
Justin;  but  Eusebius  in  support  of  tiiis 
quotes  a  passage  from  Talian,*  the  scho- 
lar of  Justin,  which  can  by  no  means  be 
used  to  prove  it;  for  Tatian  there  says 
only,  that  Crescens  had  endeavoured  to 
compass  the  death  of  Justin,  from  which 
it  does  not  follow,  that  he  succeeded  in 
that  endeavour.f 

Eusebius  may,  however,  be  quite  right 
in  alhrming,  that  Justin  sullered  martyr- 
dom during  the  reign  of  M.  Aurelius. 
This  account  is  in  accordance  with  the 
relation  of  the  martyrdom  of  Justin  and 
his  fellow-traveller,  which,  although  it 
does  not  come  from  a  souice  entitled  to 
our  confidence,;^  yet  bears  upon  it  many 
internal  marks,  which  speak  more  in 
favour  of,  than  against  its  authenticity.^ 

The  next  to  Justin  in  order  of  time  is 
Tatian  of  Assyria,  his  disciple,  of  whom 
we  have  already  spoken  in  the  history  of 
the  Gnostic  sects.il  He  himself  in  the 
only  writing  which  we  have  of  his, 
which  we  are  about  to  mention,  gives  an 
explanation  of  the  progress  of  his  reli- 
gious development.  lie  was  brought  up 
in  heathenism  ;  and  frequent  travels  gave 
him  an  opportunity  of  learning  the  mul- 
tifarious sorts  of  heathen  worship,  which 
at  that  time  were  existing  together  in  the 
Roman  empire.  None,  among  them  all, 
could  recommeml  itself  to  him  as  reason- 
able :  not  only  did  he  observe  how  reli- 
gion in  them  was  used  to  the  service  of 
sin  ;  but  even  the  highly  wrought  allego- 
rical interpretations  of  the  ancient  myths, 
as  symbols  of  a  speculative  system  of 
natural  philosophy,  could  not  satisfy 
him,  and  it  appeared  to  him  a  dishonour- 
able proceeding  for  a  man  to  attach  him- 
self to  the  popular  religion,  who  did  not 
partake  in  the  common  religious  belief. and 
who  saw  nothing  in  its  doctrines  about 
the  gods,  but  symbols  of  the  elements 
and  powers  of  nature.     The   mysteries 

*  ^  19  orat.  contra  GrjBcos. 

t   In  the  colfcction  of  .Symeon  .MeUphrastcs. 

§  These  marks  and  (grounds  arc  the  following: 
that  it  contains  no  miraculous  tales,  anil  nothing 
exaggerated,  nothing  that  contradicts  the  siiiiplo 
circumstances  of  Christian  Churches  in  those 
days,  and  that  one  reads  nothing  at  all  ahout  Cre- 
scens in  it;  for  one  would  expect  a  Gmculus,  who 
invented  the  history  of  such  a  martyrdom,  setting 
out  from  the  supposition,  that  Crescens  comp.issed 
the  death  of  Justin,  would  have  made  him  an  im- 
portant personage,  and  told  many  tales  about  him. 

1   See  page  285. 


418 


into  which  he  sufTered  himself  to  be  ini- ] 
tiated,  appeared  to  him  also  in  the  same 
manner,  not  to  correspond  to  the  expecta- 
tions, which  they  awakened,  and  the  con- 
tradictory systems  of  the  philosophers  ] 
offered  him  no  sure  grounds  of  religious  | 
faith.  He  was  rendered  mistrustful  of 
them,  by  the  contradiction  which  he 
often  observed  in  those,  who  gave  them- 
selves out  as  philosophers,  between  the 
seriousness  which  they  exhibited  for  the 
sake  of  appearances  in  their  dress,  mein, 
and  language,  and  the  levity  of  their  con- 
duct. While  he  was  in  this  condition, 
he  came  to  the  Old  Testament,  to  which 
his  attention  was  drawn  by  what  he  had 
heard  of  the  high  antiquity  of  these  writ- 
ings, in  comparison  of  the  Hellenic  reli- 
gions, as  might  easily  be  the  case  with  a 
Syrian.  He  himself  says  of  the  impres- 
sion which  the  reading  of  this  book 
made  upon  him  :  "  These  writings  found 
acceptance  with  me  because  of  the  sim- 
plicity of  their  language,  the  unstudied- 
ness  of  the  writer,  the  intelligible  history 
of  the  creation,  because  of  the  prediction 
of  the  future,  because  of  the  vvholesome- 
ness  of  their  precepts,  and  because  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  One  God  which  prevails 
throughout  them."*  The  impression 
which  the  study  of  the  Old  Testament 
made  upon  him,  would  appear  from  this 
to  have  been  with  him  the  preparation  for 
a  belief  in  the  Gospel.^  Coming  in  this 
state  of  mind  to  Rome,  he  was  con- 
verted to  Christianity  by  Justin,  of  whom 
he  speaks  with  great  reverence. 

After  the  death  of  the  latter,  he  wrote 
his  "  Address  to  the  Heathen,"  in  which 
he  defends  the  (ptXoa-c(pia.  tuv  QoL^^a^uv 
against  the  contempt  of  the  Greeks,  who 
had,  nevertheless,  received  the  seeds  of 
all  knowledge  and  arts  originally  from  the 
Barbarians.  In  his  view  of  the  relation 
of  the  philosophy  as  well  as  the  religion 
of  the  Greeks  to  Christianity,  we  recog- 
nise far  more  the  later  than  the  earlier 
Justin.  We  have  already  observed  (page 
285,)  that  even  as  early  as  in  this  treatise, 
the  seeds  of  a  speculative  and  ascetic 
turn  of  thought  are  to  be  seen,  which  he 
probably  brought  from  Syria  with  him, 


TATIAN — ATHENAGORAS. 


•  Tatian  had  already  learned  the  untenable- 
ncss  of  Polytheism,  and  was  already  come  to  the 
persuasion  that  none  but  a  Monotheistic  religion 
eould  be  a  true  one. 

I  It  would  in  this  case  be  remarkable,  that  Ta- 
tian should  afterwards  have  become  an  anti- 
Jewish  Gnostic;  but  we  have  remarked  above, 
that  we  are  by  no  means  justified  in  this  supposi- 
tion-    See  page  286. 


as  also  its  obscure  style  betrays  the  Sy- 
rian. He  says  to  the  Heathen  :  "  Where- 
fore will  ye  excite  your  state  religion  to 
battle  against  us  .'  And  wherefore  should 
I  be  hated  as  the  most  godless  of  men, 
because  I  will  not  follow  the  laws  of 
your  religion  }  The  Emperor  commands 
taxes  to  be  paid,  I  am  ready  to  pay  them. 
The  Lord  commands  me  to  serve  him  ; 
I  know  how  I  have  to  serve  him,  for  we 
must  honour  men  as  becomes  men,  but 
fear  God  alone,  who  can  be  seen  by  no 
human  eye,  and  comprehended  by  no 
human  art.  It  is  only  when  I  am  com- 
manded to  deny  him,  that  I  refuse  to 
obey,  but  prefer  to  die,  that  I  may  not 
appear  ungrateful  and  a  liar." 

Next  to  Tatian  comes  Athenagoras, 
who  addressed  his  Apology  (7r§£<r/3£n» 
Tre^i  X^io-Tiava)»,)  to  the  Empcror  M. 
Aurelius,  and  his  son  Commodus.*  We 
have  no  distinct  account  of  this  mati''s 
personal  history.  Only  two  among  the 
ancients  mention  him,  Methodius  and 
Philip  of  Sida,  who  was  the  last  president 
of  the  school  of  Catechists  at  Alexandria, 
the  only  person  who  relates  any  thing  of 
the  history  of  the  life  of  Athenagoras  ;")" 
which,  however,  deserves  no  credit  at  all, 
because  this  writer  is 'known  to  be  unde- 
serving of  our  confidence,  and  because  it 
contradicts  other  creditable  documents, 
and  because  of  the  suspicious  circum- 
stances under  which  the  fragment  from 
him  has  come  down  to  us.  Neither 
what  Athenagoras  (see  above,)  says  of  a 
second  marriage,  nor  what  he  says  of  the 
ecstacy  of  the  prophets,  who  served  as 
the  unconscious  instruments  of  the  opera- 
tions of  the  Holy  Spirit,  suffices  to  prove 
him  a  Montanist;  because,  as  we  re- 
marked above,  the  Montanists  in  this  case 
said  nothing  altogether  new,  but  only  car- 
riefl  an  already  existing  mode  of  thought  on 
religious  and  moral  matters  to  the  extreme. 

We  have  also  a  writing  in  Defence 
of  the  Resurrection^  by  the  same  Athe- 
nagoras. 

Together  with  the  Apologists  we  may 
mention  a  writer  who  is  not  otherwise 
known  to  us,  Hermias,  who  wrotea  short 
treatise  in  ridicide  of  the  heathen  philo- 
sophers   (^lao-u^it/toj     Tiov     i^u    (piAo7o(p«v.) 

*  See  the  Essay  of  Mosheim  on  the  time  at 
which  this  Apology  was  written,  in  the  first  part 
of  his  Commentationes  ad  hist,  eccles.  pertinentes. 

f  Published  by  Dodwell,  (Dissertt.  in  Irenmum.) 
He  relates  that  Athenagoras  lived  in  the  time  of 
Adrian  and  Antoninus  Pius,  to  whom  he  presented 
his  Apology,  and  that  he  was  Catcchist  at  Alex 
andria,  before  Clement. 


ATHENAGORAS.  419 

He  seeks  to  collect  together  a  miiltitiide  |  During  the  course  of  the  second  cen- 
of  foolish  and  mutually  contradictory  opi-  tury  a  peculiar  turn  of  mind  in  theolojry 
nioiis  of  tlie  Grecian  philosophers,  without  I  was  formed  in  the  Cliurch  of  Asia  Minor, 
advancing  any  thing  positive  himself, — a  It  was  here  that  the  anti-Gnostic,  prac- 
procecding,  which  could  scarcely  be  of  tical  and  realistic  spirit  (which  we  have 
any  utility  ;  for  in  order  to  persuade  those  described  in  the  general  introduction  to 
who  had  received  a  philosophical  educa-  I  this  section,)  first  took  a  definite  form, 
tion,  more  would  be  required  than  this  j  The  practical  Christian  spirit,  which  had 
declamation,  and  with  the  ignorant  there  resulted  from  the  lono-  activity  of  the 
was  no  need  either  of  such  a  caution  Apostle  John  in  these  regions,  often  al- 
against  the  errors  of  the  philosophers,  or  \  loyed  here,  we  freely  confess  with  a  mix- 
of  such  a  negative  preparation  for  the  i  tnre  of  a  carnal  tendency,  opposed  itself 
Gospel.  We  see  in  this  Hcrmias,  an  ex- I  to  the  speculative  caprice  and  license  of 
ample  of  one  of  those  passionate  enemies  the  Gnostic  sects  and  schools,  whicli 
of  the  Grecian  philosophy,  against  whom  made  especial  progress  in  these  places. 
Clement  of  Alcxaiuh-ia  contends,  (see  A  firm  dependence  on  the  doctrines  and 
above,)  who  in  accordance  with  Jewish  declarations,  which  the  oldest  of  tlie 
fables,  deduced  the  Grecian  philosophy,  i  leaders  of  the  Church  remembered  to  have 
from  the  conmuinications  of  fallen  angels,  heard  from  tlie  mouth  of  St.  John  himself, 
This  Hermias  is  called  a  philosopher  in  opposed  a  counterbalancing  weight  to 
the  superscription  of  his  book;  it  may  i  Gnosticism  ;  and  these  men,  of  simple 
be  the  case,  that  before  his  conversion  he    spirit  and  childlike  piety,  performed  tiiis 


went  about  in  the  garb  of  the  pliilosopher 
and  then  after  his  conversion  he  passed 
over  from  enthusiasm  for  the  Grecian 
philosophy  to  passionate  hatred  against 
it.  According  to  the  dilTerent  constitu- 
tion of  men's  minds,  on  a  change  of 
opinions,  their  new  habits  of  thought  may 
be  engrafted  on  their  former,  as  in  the 
case  of  Justin  and  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
or  they  may  produce  a  violent  and  harsh 
abomination  of  their  former  sentiments. 

The  Church  in  the  great  metropolis 
of  the  Eastern  part  of  Roman  Asia — a 
flourishing  seat  of  literature — could  not 


service  towards  the  development  of  the 
Church,  that  through  them  tlie  extension 
of  the  pure  fundamental  principles  of  the 
Gospel  was  secured,  and  the  practical 
spirit  of  Christianity  preserved  unalloyed, 
although  from  the  impure  source  of  tra- 
dition, in  which  the  Divine  and  the  Hu- 
man were  often  mingled  together,  they 
received  and  attached  importance  to  many 
accompaniments  which  were  foreign  to 
the  essential  nature  of  Christianity.  But 
then,  if  only  the  fundamental  doctrines 
of  Christianity,  and  the  genuine  docu- 
ments of  the  original,  pure  commtinica- 


be  at  a  loss  for  teachers  giflcd  loilh  a  \  tion  of  the  word  of  God,  were  propa- 
learned  educaiion^  and  their  intercourse  I  gated,  provision  was  by  that  means  made, 
with  well  educated  heathens  and  Gnostics  I  that  Christianitv  should  be  able  to  cleanse 


would  evidently  spur  on  their  activity  as 
authors.  Theophilus  was  bishop  of  this 
Ciiurch  in  the  time  of  31.  Aurelius. 
After  the  death  of  this  Emperor,  he 
wrote,  during  the  reign  of  Commodus, 
an  apologetic  work  in  three  books,  ad- 
dressed to  Aulolycus,  a  heathen,  through 
whose  reproaches  against  Christianity  he 
Avas  induced  to  write  this  work,  in  which 
he  shows  himself  a  thinking  man,  and 
full  of  knowledge.  We  have  already 
quoted  some  parts  of  this  work.  It  is 
remarkable  that  this  Theophilus,  who 
wrote  against  3Iarcion  and  llermogenes, 
composed  also  a  commentary  on  the  Holy 
Scripture.  We  see  here  the  seed  of  that 
exegetic  disposition  of  the  Antiochian 
Church,  of  w^hich  we  shall  speak  again 
at  the  end  of  this  section.* 


itself  by  its  inward  divine  power  from 
such  dross,  as  in  the  stream  of  its  tem- 
poral   development    it    must   constantly 


*   Jerome   c.   26.    de   vir.   ill.  quotes  a   com 
mentary  of  his  in  evangelium,  (which  may  de-  1  itself  in  the  work  lirst  quoted. 


note  the  whole  corpus  evangeliorum,)  and  on  tho 
Proverbs,  but  he  adds :  "  qui  mihi  cum  supcrio- 
rum  voluminum  eleffantia  et  phrasi  non  vidcntur 
congrucre."  But  in  his  preface  to  his  Commen- 
tary on  St.  Matthew,  he  distinctly  quotes  Com- 
mentiiries  of  Theopiiilus ;  and  in  liis  leltei  to 
Algasia,  t.  iv.  p.  197,  lie  quotes,  as  it  appears,  an 
explanatory  harmony,  or  synopsis  of  the  Gos|>els 
l)y  him  (qui  quatnor  Evangciistarum  in  unum  opus 
dicta  compingens.)  All  this  may  certiinly  be 
only  notices  of  the  sam''  work.  We  have  no- 
thing more  of  his  (as  tho  Latin  fraemenLs  nndor 
the  name  of  Theophilus  do  not  lyclong  to  him.) 
unless  the  Catena;  contain  fragment.-*  of  his.  'J'iie 
specimen  which  Jerome  gives  of  his  mode  of  in- 
terpretation is  far  from  the  spirit  of  the  late  An- 
tiochian school,  for  it  shows  a  fanciful  mode  of 
allegorizing,  which  might  suit  well  enough  with 
the    Alexandrian    cast    of  mind,  which   betrays 


420 


HEGESIPPUS — HIS    ECCLESIASTICAL    VIEWS. 


contract.  But  could  the  spirit  of  Gnos- 
ticism have  obtained  the  victory;  then, 
inasmuch  as  it  destroys  tlie  essential 
foundations  of  Christianity,  the  collection 
of  tlie  holy  original  documents  would 
have  been  sacrificed  to  caprice,  and  the 
possibility  of  such  a  process  of  purifica- 
tion would  thus  have  been  cut  off. 

It  was  the  endeavour  of  these  teachers  of 
the  Church  to  oppose  to  the  caprice  of 
the  Gnostics  the  concordant  tradition  of 
the  Christian  Churches,  especially  of  those 
of  apostolical  origin.  From  this  en- 
deavour, apparently  proceeded  the  first 
beginning  of  an  Ecclesiastical  History, 
the  work  of  Hegesippns,  a  Jew  of  Asia 
Minor,  converted  to  Christianity,  who 
lived  during  the  reigns  of  Hadrian  and 
the  Antonines,  and  who,  perhaps,  in  order 
to  reconcile  differences  between  the  usages 
of  the  .Jewish  and  heathen  churches,  or 
to  persuade  himself  by  ocular  demon- 
stration of  the  harmony  of  all  old  Churches 
in  the  essentials  of  Christianity,  under- 
took a  journey  to  Rome  in  the  days  of 
Antoninus  Pius,  and  remained  there  for  a 
season.  The  result  of  his  inquiries  and 
collections  was  his  "  Five  Books  of  Ec- 
clesiastical Events"  (tte^ts  viroixtnixuTo.  Ix- 
xXr,aia,a-TiKu»  w^a^^uv.)  He  may,  perhaps, 
here  have  inserted  much  impure  tradition 
of  Jewish  origin,  and  have  been  influ- 
enced by  many  errors,  proceeding  from  a 
Judaeo-Christian  carnal  mode  of  thought. 
The  picture  of  James,  who  was  called  the 
brother  of  the  Lord,  is  painted  by  him 
entirely  in  the  taste  of  the  Ebionites.* 
From  a  quotation,  however,  made  by  Ste- 
phanus  Gobarus,!  a  monophysite  writer 
of  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century,  it 
may  be  concluded,  that  he  was,  as  a  proper 
Ebionite,an  opponent  of  the  Apostle  Paul; 
for  in  the  fifth  book  of  his  Ecclesiastical 
History,  after  citing  the  words  of  1  Cor. 
ii.  9,  ''  That  Avhich  no  eye  hath  seen,  no 
ear  heard,  nor  hath  it  entered  into  the 
heart  of  any  man  ;■■  he  says  that  this  is 
false,  and  that  those  wiio  said  such  things 
belied  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Lord, 
who  said,  "  Blessed  are  your  eyes,  for  they 
see,  and  your  ears,  for  they  hear."  Matt. 
xiii.  16.J  If  we  refer  these  words  of 
Hegesippns  to  the  above  cited  passage 
of  St.  Paul,  it  appears  to  follow,  that  lie 
accused  him  of  false  doctrine ;  nay,  ac- 


cused him  of  having  quoted  something 
under  the  name  of  Scripture,  which  is  not 
to  be  found  there.  But  the  contentment  of 
Hegesippns  with  the  general  tradition  of 
the  CImrch,  and  his  connection  with  tlie 
Church  of  Rome,  oppose  this  supposition. 
According  to  this  supposition,  he  must 
have  been  an  opponent  of  both.  As  far 
as  we  can  judge,  (without  knowing  the 
context  that  belongs  to  these  words  of 
Hegesippns,)  we  should,  therefore,  far 
rather  conjecture,  that  he  said  this  not  in 
opposition  to  St.  Paul,  but  in  his  angry 
zeal  against  the  opponents  of  carnal  Chi- 
liasm,  who  might  probably  enough  quote 
the  above  passage  of  St.  Paul,  and  similar 
ones  in  order  to  oppose  sensual  repre- 
sentations of  the  happiness  of  tlie  world 
to  come. 

The  contests  ahont  the  time  of  Easter, 
(see  above,)  and  concerning  the  Monta- 
nistic  spirit  of  prophecy,  gave  afterwards, 
as  well  as  the  controversies  against  the 
Gnostics,  and  the  Apologies  against  the 
heathens,  another  circumstance  to  exer- 
cise the  activity  of  these  Church-teachers, 
as  authors.  The  list  of  the  writings  of 
Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  whom  we  have 
already  mentioned  as  the  author  of  an 
Apology  addressed  to  the  Emperor  M. 
Aurelius,  shows  with  what  matters  the 
Church-teachers  of  Asia  Minor  then  oc- 
cupied themselves.  We  find  among  them 
the  following  treatises :  on  Right  Con- 
duct^ on  the  Prophets,  of  Prophecy,  of  the 
Church,  of  tlie  Revelation  of  St.  John 
(which  writings  may  collectively  refer  to 
the  circumstances  of  the  Montanistic  con- 
troversy,) the  Key  (i  x^eki)  (perhaps  this 
also  refers  to  the  keys  of  the  Church,* 
in  reference  to  the  controversies  about 
penitence,)  a  treatise  on  Sunday  (perhaps 
in  reference  to  the  controversies  between 
the  Jewish  and  heathen  Christians  about 
the  festival  of  the  Sabbath,  or  Sunday,) 
on  the  Corporeality  of  God,  a  defence  of 
that  sensnous  anti-Gnostic  conception.^ 
The  contents  of  the  following  treatises 
may  also  refer  to  the  controversies  against 
Gnosticism :  on  the  JYature  of  Man,  on 


*  Euseb.  ii.  23. 

•\  In  Photius,  Cod.  235. 

-rawTa  <pst^£vwj  Tail'  Te  flaaiir  y^xt^um  x«;  tcu  Ki/p/iu 


*  [The  Power  of  the  Kci/.t  is  the  more  usual 
English  phrase,  liut  this  would  include  more  than 
the  subject  of  Penitence. — TI.  J.  R.] 

f  TTipi  tv(j-m/ji.ctTi:v  Qi'M,  These  words  might  be 
taken  to  mean,  concerning  the  appearance  of  God 
in  ike  flesh  ,-  or,  concerning  the  incarnation  of 
God.  But  a  comparison  with  the  account  of  the 
trustworthy  Origen,  on  the  contents  of  the  book, 
(fragment.  Commentar.  in  Gen.  vol.  ii.  0pp. 
fol.  25,)  compels  us  to  the  explanation  we  have 
given. 


IREN^US — NOT   A   MONTANIST. 


421 


the  Creation  of  the  SohZ,  or  on  tlie  Body^ 
or  on  the  Spirit,  on  the  Birth  of  Christ, 
on  Truth,  on  Faith,  on  the  Setises  of  the 
obedience  of  Faith*  Tlie  importance  of 
the  subjects,  and  their  deep  hohl  upon 
tlie  life  of  the  Church  in  those  times,! 
make  us  regret  the  more  the  loss  of  these  j 
writings.  I 

Claudius  Apollinaris,  whom  we  men- 1 
lioned  above,  bishop  of  Ilierapolis,  in  I 
Phrygiu,  was  a  contemporary  of. Mel  ito;  his 
writings,  although  not  so  numerous,  were 
occupied  with  several  similar  matters.f 

From  the  school  of  these  Church- 
teachers  of  Asia  Elinor,  proceeded  Ire- 
naeus  ;  who,  after  the  martyrdom  of  Po- 
thinus,  became  bishop  of  the  Church  of 
Lyons  and  Vienne  (see  above.)  lie  re- 
membered, even    in    his    advanced  age, 


*  The  list  of  writings  is  to  be  found  in  Euse- 
bius,  iv.  26.  [Tlie  expression  in  Neander  is, 
"ro«  den  Sinnen  des  glaubigen  Gehorsams  .•" 
which  appears  to  me  to  be  only  capable  of  the 
above  translation,  or  of  this,  "  about  the  senses  of 
faithful  obedience ;"  i.  e.  about  the  senses,  by  which 
we  perceive  and  accede  to  the  doctrines  of  the  faith ; , 
meaning:,  perhaps,  our  inward  means  of  perception, 
&c.  On  referring,  however,  to  Eusebius,  I  see  that 
the  title  of  the  work  is.  I  Tipi  Jtxx-.oc  tittio);  xi'Ait- 
Txptaiv,  on  which  in  Heinichen's  edition,  I  find  j 
the  following  note  extracted  (I  believe)  from  Va- 
lesius.  "O  Trift  Cttuxm;,  &c.  Apud  Nicephorum  le- 
gitur  0  Triii  i/TTiKMC  Trir-TiUK'  h:u  0  Trift  a.lo'SxTitptaiv, 
ut  duo  fuerint  Mclitoiiis  libri;  alter  de  obedientia 
fidei,  alter  de  sensibus,  idque  confirmant  Hierony- 
mus  et  Rufinus.  In  omnibus  tamen  nostris  codi- 
cibus  legitur  kxi  o  -rai  Crix.',»;  Trtcruex  oufiuTupiaiv 
absque  distinctione,  quam  R.  Stcplianus  post 
'  vocem  TTKntte;  addidit.  Fuit  igitur  hie  Melitonis 
liber  ita  inscriptus.  De  obedientia  sensuum  fidei, 
seu  quod  idem  est,  de  obedientia  fidei,  qux  fit 
a  sensibus.  Quiilam  enim  hxretici  aiebant, 
animales  quidem  seu  psychicos  sensuum  opera, 
spiritales  vero  per  rationem.  Ita  Heracleo  expli- 
cabat  locum  ilium  ex  Joannis  evangelio:  Nisi 
signa  et  piodigia  vidmtis,  mn  credctis.  Qua; 
Christi  verba  aiebat  Heracleo  dici  proprie  ad  eos, 
qui  per  opera  et  sensus  naturam  hal>eant  obedi- 
endi,  non  autem  credendi  per  rationem.  Refert 
hfecOrigines  enarrationum  in  Joannis  Evangelium 
tomo  xiii.,  ubi  id  refuUt,  docct(iue  Uim  spiritales 
quam  animales  non  pos.se  nisi  per  sensum  cre- 
dere." This  title  is,  therefore,  differently  under- 
stood by  others,  and  made  to  mean  on  the  acceptance 
of  the  faith  Ijy  means  of  the  senses.  On  Hera- 
cleon,  see  Grabe  Spicil.  vol.  ii.  p.  80,  N.B.  The 
titles  of  the  works  are  altogether  uncertain,  from 
the  vaiious  lections  in  this  passage. — H.  J.  R.] 

-j-  If  in  the  Catenae,  especially  in  the  Catena  of 
Niccpharus  on  the  Octulcuc/ius,  published  at 
Leipzig,  1772,  the  fragments  which  belong  to  this 
Apollinaris  were  pro[)erly  separated  from  those 
which  belong  to  .\pollinaris  of  Laodicea,  and  the 
fragments  in  Eusebius,  and  the  Chronicon  Pas- 
chale  Alexandrinum,  were  compared  with  them, 
the  character  of  this  Church-teacher  might  be 
drawn  more  definitely. 


what  he  had  heard  in  his  youth  from 
the  mouth  of  Polycarp,  about  the  life  and 
doctrine  of  Christ  and  the  apostles.  I:i  a 
piece  addressed  to  Florinus,  an  heretical 
teacher,  with  whom  he  had  been  in  his 
youth  with  Polycarj),  he  says,  '•'These 
doctrines,  the  Elders,  who  preceded  us, 
and  were  in  habits  of  intercourse  with 
the  apostles,  have  not  delivered  to  you  • 
for  when  I  was  a  boy,  I  saw  you*  with 
Polycarp  in  Asia  .Minor,  for  I  remember 
what  then  happened  better  than  things  of 
the  present  day;  wliat  we  have  learnt  in 
childhood  grows  up  with  the  soul,  and 
becomes  one  with  it,  so  that  I  could  de- 
scribe the  place  in  which  the  holy  Poly- 
carp used  to  sit  and  talk,  his  outgoing 
and  his  incoming,  his  mode  of  life,  his 
personal  appearance,  the  discourses  he 
addressed  to  the  multitude,  and  his  own 
account  of  his  intercourse  with  John,  as 
well  as  with  the  rest  of  those  who  had 
seen  the  Lord  ;  and  how  he  remembered 
their  conversations,  and  the  account  they 
gave  of  the  Lord's  miracles  and  doctrines. 
VVhile  he  related  all  from  the  accounts  of 
eyewitnesses  of  his  life,  he  related  it  in 
entire  accordance  with  the  Scripture. 
This  I  heard  at  that  time  with  earnest- 
ness by  reason  of  the  grace  of  God  im- 
parted to  me,  writing  it  down,  not  on 
paper,  but  on  mv  heart,  and  I  am  able  by 
the  grace  of  God,  constantly  to  brinsf  it 
with  freshness  into  my  memory.  I  can 
also  testify  before  God,  that  if  that  blessed 
and  apostolic  Presbyter  had  heard  any 
such  thing,  he  would  have  cried  out  at 
once,  and  stopped  his  ears,  and  have  said, 
according  to  his  custom,  'O!  good  God! 
for  what  a  time  hast  thou  preserved  me, 
that  I  should  endure  this !'  and  he  would 
have  left  the  place,  where  he  was  sitting 
or  standing,  when  he  heard  such  lan- 
guage."! '1^'iP  spirit,  which  here  speaks 
out,  was  inherited  by  Irenacus.  We  have 
already  spoken  of  his  peculiar  prac- 
tical disposition  in  his  conception  and 
mode  of  handling  tiie  doctrine  of  Paiih, 
his  zeal  for  the  essentials  of  Christianity, 
and  his  moderation  and  liberality  in  con- 
troversies about  external,  nonessential 
things.  We  oliserved  above  (see  p.  o3-5,) 
that  he  apparently  came  forward  as  a 
peacemaker  between  the  Montanists  and 
their  most  violent  adver.'jaries.  This  sup- 
position suits  best  with  the  spiVit  df  bis 
writings;  for  his  having  many  opinions 


•  [Neander  has  here  omitted  n  part  of  the  sen- 
tence. Kx/Ar/M:  vftrrcfTaL  i»  th  Rtrt/JK*  x'jXx,  ku 
■mpmutioi  liji'Mfjtui  -raf  aurit. — H.  J.  R.] 

+  Euseb.  V.  20. 

2N 


422 

and  dispositions,  which  agreed  with  the 
spirit  of  IMontaiiism,  and  which  would, 
therefore,  contribute  particularly  to  en- 
dear him  to  a  Tertullian,  cannot,  after 
the  observations  we  made  above,  about 
the  relations  of  Montanism  and  the  opi- 
nions of  the  Church,  at  all  serve  as  a 
proof  that  he  was  a  Montanist.  Had  he 
been  a  zealous  Montanist,  whenever  he 
touched  upon  a  darling  theme  of  Mon- 
tanism, he  could  scarcely  have  omitted 
to  appeal  to  the  new  explanations  com- 
municated by  the  Paraclete;  but  lie  al- 
ways appeals  only  to  Scripture,  or  to  the 
traditions  of  those  elders  of  Asia  Minor. 
But  we  cannot  possibly  suppose,  that 
Avhere  he  speaks  of  the  condemnation  of 
false  prophets,  he  means  by  that  the 
Montanistic  prophets,  for  he  was  probably 
too  favourable  to  the  Montanists  for  this  ; 
but  as  a  zealous  Montanist,  he  would 
hardly  have  omitted  to  mention,  with 
the  false  prophets,  also  the  opponents  of 
the  true  prophets ;  because  he  is  here 
reckoning  up  every  thing  deserving  of 
condemnation.  Instead  of  this,  a  passage 
follows,  which  far  more  characterizes  the 
peace-loving  spirit  of  Irenasus,  which  en- 
deavoured to  prevent  a  schism  between 
the  Montanistic  and  other  Churches,  as  it 
made  peace  in  the  controversies  about 
Easter:  "The  Lord  will  also  judge  those, 
who  create  schisms,  who  have  not  the 
love  of  God,  and  seek  their  own  advan- 
tage, not  the  unity  of  the  Church  ;  who, 
for  slight  reasons,  cut  in  pieces  the  great 
and  glorious  body  of  Christ,  and,  as  much 
as  in  them  lies,  destroy  it,  who  really  do 
strain  out  a  gnat  and  swallow  a  camel. 
But  no  advantage  which  they  can  ofler, 
can  counterbalance  the  evil  of  schism."* 
These  were  the  principles  on  wiiich  he 
acted  also  in  the  controversies  about 
Easter  (see  above. )| 

The  chief  work  of  Iren?eus,  which  for 
the  most  part  has  only  descended  to  us 
in  the  old  literal  Latin  translation,  with 
important  fragments  of  the  original  Greek, 
is  his  Confutation  of  the  Gnostic  Sys- 
tems, in  five  books,  which  has  preserved 
to  us  the  most  graphic  picture  of  his 
mind. 

Many  of  the  writings  of  Iren^us  we 
know  only  by  name.     He  himself  cites 


CHIEF  WORK    OP    IREN^US. 


a  writing  in  which  he  has  treated  of  a 
matter,  which  seems  to  be  quite  foreign 
to  the  Father's  turn  of  mind ;  viz.  of  the 
peculiarities  of  St.  PauPs  style,  the  hy- 
perbata  which  so  often  occur  in  his 
writings.*  It  is  probable  that  this  treatise 
was  not  expressly  upon  the  peculiar  lan- 
guage of  this  apostle,  but  that  Irenaeus 
incidentanlly  touches  upon  this  subject, 
while  he  is  combating  the  capricious 
nature  of  the  Gnostic  exegesis,  which,  no 
doubt,  despised  with  theosophic  contempt 
(see  above)  the  simple  rules  of  all  just 
interpretation.  He  justly  observes,  tliat 
the  origin  of  this  peculiarity  in  St.  Paul's 
style  lies  in  the  overwhelming  press  of 
thoughts  that  arise  in  his  ardent  spirit  -,1 
a  remark  which,  as  it  presupposes  a  re- 
cognition of  the  natural  peculiarities  of 
man's  character  while  under  the  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  founded  upon  a 
more  liberal  and  just  conception  of  inspi- 
ration, although  Irenaeus  may  not  have 
been  aware  of  it. 

It  will  besides,  be  seen  by  this  example, 
as  we  have  before  observed,  that  the  op- 
position to  Gnosticism  promoted  the 
growth  of  sound  hermeneutical  principles, 
although  they  were  not  always  justly 
used,  but  their  application  was  sometimes 
led  astray  to  serve  the  purpose  of  a  mo- 
ment in  regard  to  some  doctrinal  contro- 
versy, as  was  the  case  with  Irenaeus  in 
the  passage  we  have  quoted. 

Among  the  writings  of  this  Father, 
which  we  find  named  by  the  ancients, 
we  shall  only  mention  two  letters,  which 
have  an  historical  importance  in  conse- 
quence of  their  subject,  because  schisms 
in  the  Romish  Church  were  to  be  healed 
up  by  them.  One  is  addressed  to  Blastus, 
who  was  probably  a  presbyter  of  the 
Romish  Church.  The  account  in  the  ad- 
ditions to  Tertullian  de  PraiscriptioneJ  is 
likely  enough  to  be  true,  viz.  that  Blastus 
had  introduced  a  schism  into  the  Romish 
Church  by  his  adherence  to  the  usage  of 
Asia  Minor  in  regard  to  the  time  of  the 
Paschal  festival.  This  suits  perfectly  well 
with  the  time  of  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome; 
and  perhaps,  also  many  other  Jewish  no- 
tions were  interwoven  with  this  opinion 
about  Easter. 

The  other  letter  was   addressed   to  a 


•  L.  iv.  c.  33,  §  6.  [L.  iv.  c.  62.  Ed.  Bill,  and 
Teuard.  Paris,  167.5.] 

•j-  It  may  be  concluded,  also,  from  the  manner 
in  which  Tertullian  adv.  Valentinian,  c.  5,  speaks 
of  Irciifcus,  that  he  was  no  Montanist,  for  other- 
wise  he  would  have  called  him  "  noster "  as  he 
does  call  Proculus  immediately  after. 


*  L.  III.  c.  7.  quemadmodum  de  [ex  al.  edit. 
II.  .1.  R.]  multis  et  alibi  ostendimus  cum  utentem. 

I  Propter  velocitatcm  scrmonum  suorum  et 
propter  impetum,  qui  in  ipso  est,  sjiiritus. 

i  [Ita  Neander.  I  find  the  passage  he  alludes 
to  in  the  addition  found  in  the  MS.  of  Agobardus  to 
the  treatise  de  Prffiscriptione  Hsereticorum,  ^  liii.] 


nippoLYTus.  423 

presbyter,  named  Florinus,  M-ilh  whom  :  ters  of  the  first  half  of  the  third  century; 
Irenaeusin  early  yoiith  had  lived  with  the  but  unfortunately  only  a  very  small  por- 
aged  Polycarp ;  and  who,  it  would  seem,  tion  of  his  works  has  remained  to  us. 
carried  Monarchianism,  or  the  doctrine  Tlie  testimony,  however,  of  Photius, 
of  one  God,  as  tlie  Creator  of  all  Being,  '  taken  by  itself,  is  not  sufficient  to  esla- 
to  such  an  extreme,  that  he  made  God  the  j  Wish  tlie  account  that  he  was  a  disciple 
origin  of  evil.*  .of   Iienajus;  but  since,  as  appears  from 

Hippolytus  is  named  as  a  disciple  of  j  his  quotation,  expressions  of  llippolytus 
Irenajus  by  Photius,!  and  took  a  promi- |  himself  about  his  connection  with  Ire- 
nent  place  among  the  ecclesiastical  wri-  i  najus  lay  before  his  eyes,  and  since  in  the 

'turn  of  mind  of  Hippolytus,  so  far  as  we 

•  It  is  difficult  to  juJse  from  the  title  of  the  can  judge  of  it  from  the  fra-mients  aud 
book,  as  It  ,s  quoted  by  Eu.ehiu.  v  26,  in  what  I  j^i^^  „j-  j^j^  ,vorks, .  in  as  Air  as  these  give 
the  pecuUaritv  ot  the  opinions  of  Florinus  con-  r    i         ■  .      •      " 

sisted.  The 'title  is  te^,  ju:,^^'*,  «  ^,  rci,  ^;,  '  "^  ""X  '"^«"S  ot  drawing  conclusions  as 
»i».i  r:v  0«-,y  tmt>,v  km'^^v.  The  first  part  of  j  ^o  their  Contents,  and  the  tendency  of  his 
this  title  may  be  taken  to  moan  that  Florinus,  as  exertions  as  an  author,)  there  is  nothing 
a  Gnostic  Dualist,  had  denied  the  doctrine  of  the  to  oppose  such  a  supposition,  but  rather, 
f^ov:>r^ix;hat  then  this  will  not  suit  the  second  |  on  the  contrary,  much  to  favour  it,  we 
part,  lor  this  cannot  be  understood  as  if  Florinus  i  r  •  i        •  i  ■    .       i  • 

had  maintained  the  existence  of  an  ahsolufe  evil    '"^y/^"-  >'  g'^e  credit  to  this  account. 
principle  [I.e.  an  i7idcpendent07ie.—li.LU.]0T        Hippolytus   was  a  bishop.     But  since 

neither  Eusebius  nor  Jerome  was  able  to 
indicate  the  city  in  which  he  was  bishop, 
we  cannot  state  any  thing  definite  on  tiie 
subject,  nor  do  the  later  accounts,  which 


also   that  Florinus   had   made   God    the   creator 
of  evil,  whether  it  was  in  accordance  with  a  doc- 


a  Deiniurgos,  as  the  author  of  an  imperfect  uni- 
verse, for  in  this  case  the  title  must  have  run  thus, 
Tnpi  TM  /jL>i  tivAt  Qav  tcv  ts/dtji:'  KtKuiv.*  It  can, 
therefore,   only    be    understood    to    mean,    that 

Irenaeus  wished  to  show  how  we  must  maintain    „i„„„  i  •       „„    ■       »      i  •    *  .1         .1 

the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  (the  Monarchia,)  with-  P'^^^,  *"^  '^^.  '"  ^'i^'^'^'  .  \^'  ^'»;  ''^\^'':! 
out  makin-  the  ^,*  .px"  the  cp^n  rm  k^^,,  and    "'"'*="  P'^ce  It  in  the  neighbourhood  ot 

Rome,|  deserve  consideration.  Certainly 
there  is  much  to  prove  that  the  sphere  of 
trine  of  absolute  predestination,  which  many  un-  j  his  exertions  was  in  the  East,  and  much, 
informed  Christians  had  imagined  from  passages  J  ^.j  ^jie  contrary,  to  fix  it  in  the  West. 
01  the  Old  1  fstament,  which  they  understood  too    r>    .1     .1  •'•  1  1    i   u 

lUov.u  /  r  ,^  n,-  »  TJi;:i„„  1  „  ;  r,  i-r  I  Both  these  points  may  be  reconciled  bv 
literally,  (according  to  Urigen,  rhilocal.c.i.  p.  17.    .  ,      .        r  j  ,.     ,„. 

Tw:«/T«  J,T.A*«5.vcvTt;  n^i  t:.  er.v,i^'A^  ci/s  t::;  |  ""roducuig  the  Supposition  ol  diflerent 
i^cT^tTCB  H.U  i-iiKurxrcu  uvS^MTcy,  forming  such  j  times ;  and  this  very  circumstance,  that  he 
opinions  of  God  as  they  would  not  of  the  most  j  was  occupied  at  dilferent  times  in  dillerent 
unjust  and  cruel  of  men.)  or  whether  it  was,  that  countries,  may  have  given  rise  to  the  iiulis- 
he  made  God  the  creator  of  an  absolute  evil  \  Unciness  of  the  ancient  accounts  of  him. 
principle,  whether  a  conscious  or  an  inconscious  |       i.r  ,  ,   •  ,.  .  ,  ,- 

one  (an  kC..)  But  farther,  had  Florinus  only  I  .  ^^<^  !"^>'  «'^/a'"  ^  P^'''^*^'  catalogue  ot 
held  one  of  the  common  Gnostic  doctrines  about  [  "/s  writings,  by  comparing  together  the 
the  origin  of  evil,  Irensus  would  not  have  said,  citations  of  Eusebius  and  Jerome,  the 
that  no  heretic  even  had  ventured  to  bring  forward  specification  of  his  works  found  upon  the 
such  a  doctrine.  SinceEuscbius  says,  that  Florinus  marble  statuet  to  his  memory,  which  was 
aftervvards  allowed  himself  to  be  carried  away  by    j  ^^  ^  ^,^  ^,^g  ,.^^,,   ^^  .p,^.^^,; 

the  Valentinian  doctrines,  and  that  lrena;us  was     .     ,-w   ', --,     ,,  .      ,-  «,     .  i 

in  consequence  induced  to  write  his  book  r../  :>-  [  A"  ^-  ^p'^^  ^'^e  account  ol  PI»otius,  and 
i-.uJo,  against  him  (see  above  in  the  account  of  the  |  the  caUilogue  of  Ebed|esii,§  the  Nesloriail 
Gnostic  systems,)  it  would  seem  to  follow  from  ;  writer  of  the  thirteenth  century.  We  see 
this,  that  the  earlier  doctrines  of  Florinus  wrre  nr>  from  these  indications,  that  he  wrote 
Gnostic  doctrines.     One  is  inclined,  therefore,  to  \  various    exegetical,    doctrinal,   polemico- 

think  that,  while  Florinus  acknowledged  the  un-  |  ' 

tenableness  of  a  theorj',  which  placed  the  cause  [  '         ~  ~       ;  T 

of  evil  in  God,  he  fell  into  the  opposite  extreme,  '  According  to  one  supposition  it  was  Tortus 

and  supposed  a  self-existent  indei)endent  principle  Romanus,  or  .\den,  m  .\ral.ia,  to  which  report, 
of  evil  out  of  God.  perhaps,  only  a  misunderstanding  of  tlie  pas-sage 

Eusehius,  vi.  20,  may  have  given  rise. 


[See  Middleion  on  the  Greek  Article,  p.  50, 
the  edition  of  1833,  by  my  late  brother.     This 


■j-  Portus  Romaiius — Ostia. 

i  In  which  he  is  represented  as  silting  on  his 


is  only  in  accordance  with  the  well  known  rule.  Episcopal  scat,  xa^j/j*  or  6p:r:,-,  and  underneath 
thai  in  such  propositions  the  subject  has  the  arti-  him  is  the  sixteen-year  Cycle  of  Easter,  prepared 
cle,  and  the  predicate  has  not.  ^  The  translation  by  him,  kuvu*  tKnaJumrxf^iv.:,  of  which  there  in  a 
of  the  first  title  would  be  on  the  Unity  of  (iod,  or  an  f^n  investigali.m  in  the 'second  ])art  of  Ideler's 
essay  to  show  that  God  is  not  ll,e  creator  „/ evil.  H^ndbuch  der  Chronologic,  p.  2U,  &c.  'I'ho 
Of  the  second  it  y"'/^^^*^-'"/''";^, '''»'''"-'  monument  iUs..|f  is  puhlished  in  the  first  part  of 
creator  of  evi   (1.  e.  the  Demiurgos,  or  whosoever     ,        ...        ,      1.^  1   •  •  r  .1  1       r  u- 

It  may  be  irho.oe  existence  is  assumed  as  creator  of  the  edition,  by  I  abr.cms,  of  the  works  of  Hip- 
evil)  is  not  God.— H.  J.  R.]  !  polytus.  .„.,,,        ^.        ,.       ...       . 

t  Cod.  121.  1      §  In  Assemani  Dibliotheca  Qncntalu,t.ui.p.  I. 


HIPPOLYTIiS    ON    THE    WRITINGS    OF    ST.    JOHN. 


424 


doctrinal  and  chronological  works,  and 
homilies. 

We  shall  mention  only  those  of  his 
writings,  the  subject  of  which  gives  them 
an  historical  importance.  In  regard  to 
Exegesis,  Jerome  hints  that  he  preceded 
Origen  in  giving  an  example  of  an  ac- 
complished interpretation  of  Scripture, 
and  that  Ambrosius,  (see  below,)  the 
friend  of  Origen,  had  urged  him  to  fol- 
low this  example.  He  must  somewhere, 
whether  it  was  at  Alexandria,  in  Pales- 
tine, or  in  Arabia,  have  met  with  Origen, 
because  Jerome  cites  a  homily  by  Hip- 
poly  tus  in  praise  of  our  Saviour,  which  he 
had  delivered  in  the  presence  of  Origen.* 
Hia  Exegesis,  judging  from  the  few  frag- 
ments that  remain,  was  of  the  allegorizing 
kind. 

In  the  enumeration  of  his  writings  on 
that  old  monument,  a  work  occurs  v-n-i^ 

rov     xuroc.      loictvyriv     ttia,yyt7\iav     Kcci     cciro- 

y.ahvi^iui;.  This  can  hardly  be  a  com- 
mentary on  these  two  books  of  the  Bible, 
although  Jerome  seems  to  quote  a  com- 
mentary of  Hippolytus  on  the  Revela- 
tions ;  but  this  title  would  far  more  indi- 
cate a  piece  written  in  defence  of  those 
two  books.  This  is  also  in  accordance 
Avith  the  title,  which  Ebedjesu  gives  to 
this  work.  We  must,  therefore,  suppose 
it  a  defence  of  the  genuineness  of  these 
scriptural  books,  and  a  justification  of 
them  from  the  reproaches  of  the  Alogi. 
If  Hippolytus  in  this  appears  as  an  oppo- 
nent of  the  Ultra  anti-Montanists,  this 
agrees  with  the  fact,  that  he  wrote  a  book 
on  the  Charismata.t  We  may  here  refer 
to  the  circumstance  that  Stephanus  Go- 
barus,  in  Photius,  1.  c,  opposes  to  each 
other  the  opinions  of  Hippolytus  and 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  about  the  Montanists, 
from  which  we  may  conclude,  that  the 
former  belonged  to  the  defenders  of  the 
Montanists.  We  have  no  means  of  de- 
termining with  certainty  whether  the 
y.t(pa,Xxicc  ir^o<i  Tatoi',  which  Ebedjesu  as- 
cribes to  him,  are  to  be  brought  into  the  ac- 
count in  this  matter.  (If,  in  fact,  this  Caius 
■was  the  violent  opponent  of  Montanism.) 
A  work  of  Hippolytus  is  quoted  against 
the,  two  and  thirty  heresies^  which   (ac- 


*  Had  this  discourse  been  preserved,  it  would 
perhaps,  have  given  us  a  great  deal  of  information 
on  the  history  of  the  festivals  of  the  Epiphany 
and  Christmas. 

■\  It  cannot  be  entirely  ascertained  with  cer- 
tainty whether  this  work  bore  the  title  cltcut'-xikii 
v:t^uJ':a-if  Tri^t  ^a.fiTy.-jLTm)i,  or  whether  the  work 
on  the  Charismata,  and  the  exposition  of  the 
Apostolical  Tradition,  were  two  separate  works. 


cording  to  Photius,)  closed  with  the 
heresy  of  Noetus.  He  declares,  as  Pho- 
tius has  quoted  him,  that  he  has  in  this 
work  made  use  of  the  contents  of  a  se- 
ries of  discourses  by  Irenaeus  against 
these  heresies.*  We  have  already  quoted 
his  writing  against  Noetus,  which  is  still 
preserved,  which  probably  formed  the 
conclusion  of  this  work. 

We  have  also  an  unimportant  piece  by 
him  on  the  Antichrist^  which  was  also 
known  to  Photius.  The  same  writer 
mentions  a  commentary  on  Daniel  by 
him,  out  of  which  he  quotes  the  re- 
markable circumstance,!  that  he  placed 
the  end  of  the  world  at  500  years  at\er 
the  birth  of  Christ.  His  placing  this 
event  later  than  it  was  usual  to  represent 
it  in  the  earliest  ages  of  the  Church,  may 
be  attributed  to  the  season  of  tranquillity, 
which  the  Church  was  then  enjoying, 
under  Alexander  Severus. 

In  the  list  of  the  writings  of  Hippolytus 
on  the  monument,  a  tt^ot^etttiko*  ■s-fo? 
le/Jij^iifav  occurs.  It  is  hardly  to  be 
doubted  that  this  is  the  very  treatise,  from 
which  Theodoret,  in  his  s^«hj-t»jc,  quotes 
several  passages  under  the  title  of  a  Letter 
to  the  Queen  or  Empress  (w^o?  BaaXtSa.,) 
which  Fabricius  has  collected  in  his  edi- 
tion of  Hippolytus.  Its  contents  answer 
to  the  title,  which  the  writing  mentioned 
in  the  monument  bote;  it  is  a  discussion 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith, 
for  the  advantage  of  a  heathen  woman. 
That  Severina  must  also  have  been  a 
queen  or  an  empress.  But  the  name 
Severina  can  hardly  be  correct ;  it  must 
be  Severa,  and  it  is  in  the  highest 
degree  probable  to  suppose  it  addressed 
to  Severa,  who  was  wife  of  the  emperor 
Philippus  Arabs.     (See  above.) 

An  entirely  peculiar  character  marks 
the  theological  development  of  the  JYorth 
African  Churchy  whose  theological  spirit 
was  constantly  taking  a  more  definite 
form  from  the  time  of  Tertullian  to  that  of 
St.  Augustine,  and  afterwards  obtained  the 
greatest  influence  over  the  whole  Western 
Church  by  means  of  St.  Augustine. 

Tertullian  is  a  writer  of  peculiar  iin- 
portance,  both  as  the  first  representative 
of  the  theological  character  of  the  North 
African  Cliurch,an(l  as  the  representative 
of  the  Montanistic  opinions.     He  was  a 

*  The  words  of  Photius  are  as  follows :  t^u- 
f  Cod.  202. 


SKETCH    OP   TERTULLIAN. 


425 


man  of  ardent  mind,  warm  disposition,  and 
deeply  serious  character,*  accustomed 
to  give  iiimself  up  with  all  his  soul  and 
strength  to  tlie  object  of  his  love,  and 
hauglitily  to  reject  all  whicli  was  uncon- 
genial to  tliat  object.  lie  had  a  fund  of 
great  and  multifarious  knowledge,  but  it 
was  confusedly  heaped  up  in  his  mind, 
without  scientilic  arrangement.  His  depth 
of  thought  was  not  united  witii  logical 
clearness  and  judgment:  a  warm  un- 
governed  imagination,  that  dwelt  in  sen- 
suous images,  was  his  ruling  power. 
His  impetuous  and  haughty  disposition, 
and  his  early  education  as  an  advocate  or 
a  rhetorician,  were  prone  to  carry  him, 
especially  in  controversy,  to  rhetorical 
exaggerations.  When  he  defends  a  thing, 
of  the  truth  of  which  he  is  persuaded, 
one  often  sees  in  him  the  advocate  who 
only  collects  together  all  the  arguments 
by  which  his  cause  may  be  advanced, 
both  just  arguments  and  sophisms,  that 
deceive  by  a  mere  dazzling  appearance; 
his  very  richness  of  fancy  at  times  leads 
him  astray  from  the  perception  of  the 
simple  truth.  The  circumstance  which 
renders  this  man  a  phenomenon  of  so 
much  importance  to  the  Christian  his- 
torian, is  this,  that  Christianity  is  the 
soul  of  his  life  and  thought,  that  by 
Christianity  there  was  opened  to  him  an 
entirely  new  and  fertile  interior  world, 
but  not  until  the  leaven  of  Christianity 
could  wholly  penetrate  and  ennoble  his 
ardent,  powerful,  and  somewhat  rugged 
nature ;  we  find  the  new  wine  in  an  old 
cask ;  so  that  the  taste,  which  it  has  re- 
ceived in  that  cask,  might  easily  tleceive 
one  that  is  not  a  connoisseur.  Tertul- 
lian  had  often  more  within  him,  than  he 
could  express ;  an  adequate  form  was 
wanting  to  the  overflowing  spirit.  He 
was  compelled  first  to  create  a  language 
for  the  new  spiritual  matter  (and  that,  too, 
out  of  the  rough  Punic  Latin,)  without 
the  advantage  of  a  logical  and  gram- 
matical training,  and  to  create  it  just  as 
he  was  carried  on  in  his  ardour  by  the 
stream  of  his  thoughts  and  feelings. 
Hence  come  the  diniculties  and  obscuri- 
ties to  be  found  in  his  mode  of  writing, 
but  hence  also  come  its  originality  and 
liveliness.  Hence,  this  great  Father,  who 
united  great  gifts  with  great  faults,  has 
been  often  misunderstood  by  those  who 
could  not  acquaint  themselves  with  his 
spirit  through  the  rough  and  uncultivated, 

•   [Literally,  of  a  fiery  and  deep  spirit,  of  a 
warm  and  deep  disposition. — H.  J.  It.] 
54 


unassisted  form  in  which  it  is  presented 
to  us. 

I      Quintus  Septimius  Florens  Terlullianus 
was  born  in  the  latter  years  of  the  se- 
cond century,  probably  at  Carthage,  and 
I  was  the  son  of  a  centurion  iu  the  service 
of  the  Proconsul  at  Carthage.     He  was 
at  first  an  advocate  or  a  rhetorician,  and 
arrived  at  manhood  before  he  was  con- 
verted to  Clirisiianity ;  and  he  then  ob- 
I  tained,  if  the  account  given  l)y  Jerome  is 
correct,  the  ofllce  of  a  Presbyter.     It  is 
,  doubtful,    however,    whether    it    was    at 
1  Rome    or    Carthage.     The    latter    is,    in 
I  itself,  the  most  probable  ;  because  in  dif- 
j  fereiit    writings,    composed    at    different 
times,  he  speaks  as  if  he  were  settled  at 
i  Carthage;     although*    the    accounts    of 
I  Eusebius  and  Jerome  may  be  taken    to 
I  favour  the  former  supposition.     The  ac- 
I  cession  of  TertuUian  to  Moiitanism  mav 
I  be  sufficiently  explained  from  its  affmity 
j  to  the  early  character  of  his   mind   and 
j  disposition.     His  writings  relate  to    the 
I  most  varied  points  of  Christian  doctrine 
j  and  of  Christian  lile  :  it  is  here  a  matter 
of  great    importance,   to    separate    those 
!  among  them,  which  bear  the  stamp  of 
[  Montanism,  from  those  which  contain  no 
I  trace  of  it.+ 

•  The  words  of  Euseliius,  ii.  2.  ra,v  /urtKimt 
I  in  'PetjUh;  xt/j.7r^m,  do  not  exactly  assert,  tliat  as  a 
Christian  he  oMained  an  important  place  in  the 
Roman  Church,  but  taken  in  conjunction  with 
the  context  they  may  very  well  imply,  that  l>oforc 
!  his  conversion  to  Christianity  he  was  in  prcat  es- 
I  limation  at  Kome,  as  a  juris-consultus  (for  the 
I  arbitrary  translation  of  Kufinus,  '  inter  nostros 
I  scrijitores  admodum  clarus,'  must  at  all  events  be 
I  rejected ;)  but  we  mij^ht  then  also  conclude,  that 
I  if  Tcrtullian  lived  at  Rome  as  a  heathen,  and 
I  was  so  much  esteemed,  it  is  also  probable  that  he 
I  was  there  also  lirst  invested  with  a  spiritual  oHicc. 
!  Jerome  says  that  the  jealousy  and  injuries  of  the 
I  Romish  clergy  moved  him  to  chatipe  to  jMon- 
tanism.  But  such  stories,  which  the  ancient 
I  Church-teachers  used  to  set  about,  are  always 
I  very  suspicious,  l)ecause  men  were  universally  too 
j  much  inclined  to  altriliute  to  external  causes  a 
j  conversion  from  the  Roman  Church  to  heretical 
'  O{»inions, — and  Jerome  in  ytarticidar,  althouc;h  he 
'  reverenced  the  Caiheda  I'eiri  in  the  Roman 
Church,  was  notwithslandini;  inclined  to  s|)eak 
I  evil  of  the  Roman  cleri^y,  who  did  him  so  nmch 
,  injury  during  his  residence  at  l{ome,  cnj)ecially 
I  after  the  death  of  Uamasus,  and  to  accuse  them, 
!  in  particular,  of  jealousy  against  ^rcat  tJilenL-*. 
j  i  I  have  given  n  more  elalwral*'  investigation 
'  of  this  subject  in  my  treatise  on  'J'crtnllian. 
'  [anti-(inostikua,  Cieist  des  'I'ertullian.  lierlin, 
!  1825. — H.  J.  R.]  I  shall  here  only  add  somc- 
[  thing  in  regard  to  the  ol»jertioiiK  made  by  Dr. 
^.  Ciilln  to  my  conclusions.  He  linds  a  mark  of 
I  .Mont;uiism  in  wiiat  TertuUian  says,  do  I'atienlia 
1  c  L  "  bonurum  ^uorundam,  siculi  ct  lualorum 
2  .\  2 


LIFE    OF   TERTULLIAN. 


426 


It  is  difficult  to  decitle  the  question, 
whether  TerluUian  remained  always  in 
the  same  connection  with  the  Montanistic 
party ;  or  whether  he  afterwards  again 
inclined  more  to  the  Catholic  Church, 
and  endeavoured  to  form  a  middle  way 
between  the  two  parties.     The  narratives 

intolerabilis  magmtudo  est,  ut  aJ  capienda  et  praes- 
tanda  ea,  sola  gratia  divinae  inspirationis  opcratur." 
I  must  here  certainly  retract  the  declaration  made 
in  my  Tertullian,  p.  161,  that  there  is  nothing 
contained  in  this  pasaage  but  the  common  Chris- 
tian doctrine,  which  attributes  to  the  Holy  Spirit 
the  operation  of  all  good  in  believers.  The  fol- 
lowing is  the  idea  contained  in  the  passage  :  '  But 
for  all  good,  we  need  not  only  human  exertions, 
but  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
higher  the  grade  of  goodness  is,  the  more  man 
needs  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  there 
are  grades  of  goodness  so  exalted,  qualities  and  gifts 
of  such  elevation,  that  man  can  do  nothing  what- 
ever towards  attaining  them.  They  are  entirely  the 
free  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  man  in  these 
cases  is  only  passive,  in  regard  to  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Such  are  the  Charismata,  which  are 
to  be  separated  from  the  common  Christian  vir- 
tues.' I  acknowledge  that  there  is  something 
here  besides  the  doctrine,  which  every  Christian 
must  deduce  from  the  Bible;  but  it  need  not, 
therefore,  be  called  Montanistic.  Such  a  view 
might  proceed  from  the  original  character  of  Ter- 
tullian's  mind.  We  have  already  observed  above, 
that  the  Montanistic  notion  of  certain  operations 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  under  which  man  is  only  pas- 
sive, was  by  no  means  a  new  view ;  but  that  it 
engrafted  itself  on  a  mode  of  representation  which 
had  long  been'in  existence. 

The  passage  about  fasts  and  abstinence  cannot 
in  any  way  be  looked  upon  as  a  proof  of  Mon- 
tanism,  for  a  voluntary  uo-^witk  had  already  found 
acceptance  with  many,  who  were  no  Montanists, 
(see  above.)  'J'he  words,  'jejuiiia  conjungere,' 
might  indeed,  although  not  necessarily,  be  under- 
stood of  a  S'.iperpositio,  by  no  means  Montanistic 
(superpositio  is  a  continuation  of  the  f^riday's 
fast  to  Saturday,  on  which  day  no  Montanist 
fasted.  See  above,  page  188.)  And  besides, 
the  whole  manner  in  which  penance  is  here 
treated,  the  whole  spirit  of  mildness  which 
breathes  here,  is  not  Montanistic. 

As  far  also  as  regards  the  work  de  Prccscrip- 
tione,  I  find  myself  i)y  no  means  induced  to 
cliange  my  opinion  of  its  non-Montanistic  origin. 
The  words  '  alius  libcUus  hunc  gradum  sustinebit,' 
contr.  Marcion.  1.  i.  c.  2,  might  be  used  by  Ter- 
tullian of  a  piece  already  written,  whether  by 
himself  or  another,  by  representing  it  (the  book,) 
personified  as  a  defender.  It  does  not  at  all  fol- 
low, from  his  particularly  bringing  forward  the 
doctrine  of  a  creation  out  of  nothing,  in  his  quota- 
tion of  the  Creed,  c.  13,  that  he  had  already  had 
to  sustain  a  contest  with  Hermogencs ;  because 
even  in  the  controversy  against  the  Gnostics  this 
definition  must  have  been  brought  forward  ;  and 
the  connection  in  which  these  words  there  stand, 
far  more  favours  the  sup[)osition  that  he  was 
thinking  of  the  Gnostics,  than  that  he  had  Her- 
mogenes  in  his  thoughts.  It  is,  indeed,  quite 
certain,  from  c.  30,  that  before  Tertullian  wrote 


of  Atignstine,*  and  of  Praedestinatus,!  as 
well  as  the  account  given  by  the  latter^ 
of  a  IVIontanistic  work  of  Tertullian,  in 
which  he  endeavours  to  lessen  the  num- 
ber of  points  of  diflerence  between  tlie 
two  parties,  are  favourable  to  the  latter 
notion,  and  on  this  supposition,  many  of 
the  writings  of  Tertullian,  which  are 
moderately  Montanistic,  or  border  upon 
Montanism,  might  be  assigned  to  a  dif- 
ferent epoch.  But  these  accounts  are  not 
sufficient  to  challenge  our  belief  in  tliem. 
From  the  disposition  of  Tertullian  one  is 
led  to  think,  that  he  was  not  unlikely  to 
keep  to  his  opinions,  when  they  were 
once  formed,  and  when  opposed,  con- 
stantly the  more  to  harden  himself  in 
them.  The  peculiar  sect  of  the  Tertul- 
Uanists^  which  is  found  at  Cartilage  in  the 
fifth  century,  is  no  proof  of  the  supposi- 
tion we  have  mentioned ;  because  it  is 
possible,  that  this  sect,  which  adhered 
closely  to  the  peculiar  opinions  of  Ter- 
tullian, was  first  formed  in  later  times, 
when  it  was  cut  off  from  communication 
with  the  Montanistic  Churches  in  Asia. 

The  study  of  the  writings  of  Tertul- 
lian had  plainly  a  peculiar  influence  on 
the  doctrinal  development  of  Cyprian. 
Jerome  relates,  after  a  tradition,  supposed 
to  come  from  the  secretary  of  Cyprian, 
that  he  daily  read  some  part  of  Tertul- 
lian's  writings,  and  was  accustomed  to  call 
him  by  no  other  name  than  that  of  Master.^ 

this  book,  Hermogenes  had  brought  forv^'ard  his 
peculiar  views ;  but  it  cannot  at  all  be  proved, 
that  Hermogenes  had  not  already  published  his 
doctrines  a  long  time  before  Tertullian  wrote 
his  book  against  him.  From  the  very  cursory 
manner  in  which  Tertullian  mentions  him  in  the 
treatise  de  Prajscriptione,  we  might  be  inclined  to 
suspect,  that  Hermogencs  vias,  at  that  time,  by 
no  means  a  person  of  such  importance  in  his 
eyes,  and  that  it  was  his  additional  interest  in  the 
matter  as  a  Montanist  in  later  times,  which  moved 
him  to  enter  into  an  elaborate  refutation  of  the 
doctrines  of  Hermogencs.  The  manner  in  which 
he  speaks  of  the  emanation  of  the  Logos,  cannot 
be  called  Montanistic,  for  he  represents  it  in  the 
'  same  manner  in  the  Apologeticus,  c.  5J1, — a 
1  treatise  acknowledged  not  to  be  Montanistic. 
j  [Those  who  are  desirous  of  seeing  a  condensed 
I  statement  of  iVcander's  views  on  Tertullian's 
i  writings  may  consult  the  able  i)reface  to  Bp. 
Kaye's  work  on  Tertullian,  2d  edition,  1826. 
— H.  .1.  K.] 

•  Hieres.  86.  f  Hicres.  86.  ^  Haercs.  26. 
§  He  would  say  to  his  secretary.  Da  mihi  ma- 
gistrum.  Hieron.  de  Viris  illustribus,  c.  53.  In 
order  to  see  how  he  used  the  writings  of  Tertul- 
lian, the  treatises  of  Cyprian  de  Orutione  Domi- 
nica, and  dc  Patimtia,  in  particular  should  be 
compared  with  those  of  Tertullian  on  the  same 
subjects,  and  that  de  Idoloruin  vanitate  with  the 
Apologeticus. 


CVPRIAN HIS    LIBRI   TESTIMONIORUM 


427 


We  have  already  spoken  sufilciently  in 
various  places  of  the  character,  the  ac- 
tivity, and  the  most  important  writings  of 
Cyprian.  We  shall  liere  mention  only 
one  more  remarkable  writing  of  Cyprian, 
his  three  bocks  of  Testimonia,  a  collec- 
tion of  the  most  important  passages  of 
Scripture,  to  prove,  that  Jesns  is  the  Mes- 
siah promised  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
to  iorm  the  foundation  of  Christian  faith 
and  morals.  The  collection  was  destined 
for  a  certain  Qnirinus,  who  had  entreated 
the  bishop  to  make  him  such  an  abridg- 
ment of  the  essential  contents  of  llie 
Bible  in  regard  to  faith  and  morals,  for 
his  daily  use  and  for  the  assistance  of  his 
memory.  Since  Cyprian  addresses  him 
as  ''•  my  son,"  he  cannot  have  been  a 
bishop  or  a  presbyter,  for  whom  Cyprian 
thiew  together  this  collection  in  order  to 
assist  him  in  communicating  religious  in- 
struction.* By  comparing  the  introduc- 
tion to  the  second  and  third  books,  it  will 
appear  extremely  probable,  that  the  per- 
son, to  whom  Cyprian  wrote,  was  a  lay- 
man belonging  to  his  Church,  to  whom 
he  wished  to  give  the  means  of  making 
his  own  the  important  practical  truths, 
ami  the  most  important  rules  for  all  the 
cliief  relations  of  Christian  life.f  This 
colleclion  then  will  give  us  a  proof  of 
the  intimate  union  subsisting  between  the 
bishop  and  the  members  of  his  Church, 
who  were  troubled  about  tlie  salvation  of 
tlieir  souls,  and  show  how  much  he  had 
it  at  heart,  to  lead  every  individual  to  an 
intimate  acquaintance  with  the  Divine 
Word. — a  wish,  which  peculiarly  breaks 
forth  in  the  beautiful  words  with  which 
he  closes  the  preface  to  the  first  book  : 
"^  More  strength  will  be  granted  to  thee, 
and  the  view  of  the  understanding  will 
constantly  be  more  and  more  fully  form- 
ed, if  thou  searchest  more  perfectly  the 
Old  and  the  New  Testament,  and  runnest 


*  It  might  he  concluded  that  this  was  the  case, 
from  the  words  at  the  he^inning :  ijnihus  non  tarn 
tractassp,  quam  tractantibus  niatcriam  prahuisse 
videamur.  We  could  then  only  suppose,  that  he 
had  composed  this  hook  as  an  aid  to  a  deacon,  or 
a  catechist,  a  doctor  audientium.  But  the  words 
which  follow  show,  that  the  collection  was  also 
intended  to  infix  upon  the  memory  the  chief  pas- 
sa;jes  and  doctrines  of  the  15ihle,  hy  constantly 
readini?  them  over.  The  collection  must,  there- 
fore, in  this  case  have  been  intended  at  the  same 
time  as  a  guide  for  the  teachers  of  religion,  and  a 
book,  of  aid  for  the  Catechumens ;  but  the  view 
taken  above  is  more  natural. 

-j-  Quffi  esse  facilia  et  utilia  legentibus  possunt, 
dum  in  breviarium  pauca  digesta  et  velociter  per- 
Icguntur  et  frequenter  iterantur. 


through  every  part  of  the  Holy  Scripture  ; 
for  I  liave  only  j)oured  out  a  little  to  thee 
from  the  Divine  foimlains,  in  order  to 
satisfy  thee  for  a  time.  Thon  canst  drink 
more  plentifully  and  satisfy  thyself,  if 
thou  also  comest  with  us  to  llie  same 
fountains  of  the  Divine  fidness,  in  order 
to  drink  as  we  do." 

The    particular   rides,   which  Cyprian 
brings  forward  and  sup[)orls  by  passages 
from  the  Bible,  show    how  an.vious   he 
1  was  to  counteract  the  notion,  that  a  mere 
j  outward    confession,   and    a    compliance 
I  with    the    forms    of    Cliristian    worship, 
would  satisfy  the  demands  of  the  Cii>si)cl, 
and  serve  to  obtain  salvation  ;  but  at  the 
same  time,  we  freely  acknowledge   tliat 
they  show  also,  how  important  he  thought 
it,  to  impress  upon  the  laity  a  veneration 
for  the  priestliood,  according  to  the  no- 
!  tions  of  the  Old  Testament. 
,      We    must    here    cursorily  mention   a 
person,  who  is  of   importance  in  many 
respects  for  the  history  of  Cliristian  mo- 
rals   and    worship ;    particularly   in    the 
Norlli    African   Church,   that    is    to    say 
Commodianus,    wlio    is    known    by    his 
"  instructions  adapted  for  heatliens,  and 
all  classes  of  Christians,"  (Instructiones. 
Exhortations  and  lieproofs,")  and  written 
I  in  verse.     He  was  born  of  Christian  pa- 
rents, who  troubled  themselves  but  little 
'  about  giving  him  a  Christian  education, 
and  hence  he  joined  in  the  heathen  wor- 
ship, without    their    being   aware   of   it, 
until  he  was  led  away  from  heathenism, 
and  to  Christianity,  by  means  of  reading 
the  Bible,,  (^'^^  similiter  crravi  tempore 
multo    I    Fana    prosequendo,    parentibus 
insciis    ipsis    |    .^bstuli    me    tamen    inile, 
legendo  de  lege.)     This  passage  would, 
I  no  doubt,  bear  another  interpretation,  if 
we  were  to  put  a  stop  after  prosequendo, 
!  and  connecting    the   words    immedialely 
j  after  it  witii   what  follows  ;    but  this  is 
I  not  so  natural  a  supposition  as  the  other. 
I      In  his  Christian  notions,  and  the  picture 
I  of  manners  painted  by  him,  as  well  as  in 
his  latiniiy,  we  recognise  a  North  African 
'  who    lived    not  long   after   the   time   of 
Cvprian.     The  Ciiristians  at    that    time, 
after  some  persecutions  had  taken  place, 
(apparently  under  Deciusand  Valerianus,) 
j  were  enjoying  a  state  of   outward  pros- 
I  perity     under    Gallienus;     but    outward 
prosperity    had    also    exercised    again    a 
prejudicial  inlluence  on  the  inward  life, 
both  among  the  clerjjy  and  laity.     The 
Christians  participated  in  the  pleasures  of 
the  heathens,  and  many  teachers  of  the 
Church  gave  in  too  much  to  them,  being 


428 


ARNOBIUS — HIS    CONVERSION. 


influenced    by  presents,    or   by  fear   of 
giving  personal  offence.   (57.  Si  quidam 
doctores,  dum  expectant  niunera  vestra  j 
Aut  tinient  personas,  laxant  singula  vobis.) 

Comniodian  shows  great  zeal  for  the 
strictness  of  Christian  morals,  and  he 
speaks  against  the  delusion  of  a  false 
estimation  of  martyrdom,  as  of  an  opus 
operatum;  he  declares,  on  the  contrary, 
that  every  man  might  become  a  martyr, 
even  in  a  season  of  peace,  by  genuine 
Christian  virtue ;  and  that  on  the  con- 
trary, many  who  were  proud  of  having 
vanquished  Satan  by  their  blood,  and  did 
not  remember  that  Satan  is  always  Satan 
— had  afterwards  suffered  themselves  to 
be  conquered  by  him.  But  with  all  this, 
Conimodian  held  a  very  gross  system  of 
Chiliasm,  which  bears  upon  it  the  colour- 
ing of  carnal  Judaism.  The  chiefest 
princes  of  the  world  were,  in  the  first 
place,  to  become  the  slaves  of  the  pious 
in  the  kingdom  of  the  Millennium  ;  and  all 
the  vanity  of  the  world  under  the  influ- 
ence of  an  unchristian  imagination  is 
transferred  to  that  kingdom.  (See  In- 
struct. 80.) 

We  have  here  also  to  mention  Arno- 
bius,  as  belonging  to  the  same  Church, 
although  he  showed  a  more  peculiar  doc- 
trinal turn  of  mind,  and  the  spirit  of  the 
North  African  Church  appears,  at  least  in 
the  time  that  he  came  forward  as  a  Chris- 
tian writer,  to  have  exerted  no  influence 
upon  him, — a  fact  which  is  apparent, 
from  the  liberal  and  independent  manner 
in  which  he  seems  to  have  come  to  Chris- 
tianity through  the  reading  of  the  New 
Testament,  especially  the  Gospels.  He 
was  a  rhetorician  at  Sikka,  in  Numidia, 
during  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Dio- 
cletiau.*  His  writings  give  testimony  to 
the  literary  acquirements,  which  a  rheto- 
rician in  so  respectable  a  town  would  be  j 
required  to  have.  Jerome,  in  his  Chro- 
nicle, relates  that  Arnobius,  who  had 
previously  always  opposed  Christianity, 
was  moved  by  dreams  to  a  faith  in  it,  but 
that  tlie  bishop,  to  whom  he  applied,  did 
not  trust  him,  because  he  knew  his  former 
enmity  against  Christianity;  and  that 
Arnobius,  in  order  to  prove  the  sincerity 
of  his  intentions,  wrote  his  Apologetic 
work,  (the  septem  libros  disputationum 
contra  gontes.)  This  narrative  has  been 
suspected  of  being  a  mere  interpolation 
by  another  liand, — for  it  is,  at  all  events, 
not  in  its  proper  place ;  it  is  an  evident 
anachronism    to    suppose   that    all    this 


Hieronymus  de  vir.  illustr.  c.  79. 


should  have  taken  place  in  the  twentieth 
year  of  Constantine,  A.  D.  326.  And 
farther,  Arnobius  appears  to  have  been  a 
man  who  would  be  led  to  believe  by 
a  detailed  examination,  and  not  one  who 
would  have  been  thus  influenced  by  the 
sudden  impression  made  by  dreams.  In 
his  work,  we  recognise,  not  the  novice 
who  was  still  a  Catechumen,  but  the 
man  already  matured  in  his  conviction, 
although  not  one  who  was  orthodox 
in  the  sense  the  Church  would  aflix  to 
that  word. 

And  yet  one  is  not  led  by  these  argu- 
ments entirely  to  reject  the  narrative. 
We  have  already  observed  (p.  264,  et 
seq.,)  how  the  conversion  of  many  was 
facilitated  by  such  impressions ;  but  in 
saying  this,  it  is  not  declared,  that  his 
whole  conversion  proceeded  from  these 
impressions,  for  his  work  would  certainly 
contradict  such  a  supposition.  But  if  Ar- 
nobius, as  will  clearly  appear  from  a  pas- 
sage we  are  about  to  quote,  Avas  devoted 
to  blind  heathenish  superstition,  it  is  on 
that  account  less  unlikely  that  many  more 
outward  impressions  were  needed,  to 
lead  the  zealous  heathen  to  an  inquiry 
into  Christianity.  It  may,  indeed,  have 
been  the  case, that  he  had  been  convinced 
some  time  before  he  offered  himself  for 
baptism,  which  is  easily  to  be  explained 
by  the  circumstances  of  those  times.  His 
Apologetic  work,  however,  appears  cer- 
tainl}^  to  have  been  written  in  compliance 
with  some  inward  impulse,  and  not  in 
consequence  of  any  external  excitement. 
But  it  may  also  be  the  case,  that  his  de- 
termination to  make  a  public  confession 
of  Christianity,  and  to  come  forward  as  a 
public  defender  of  it,  were  formed  at  the 
same  time  in  his  soul — and  that  he  then 
went  with  this  resolution  to  the  bishop. 
In  after  times,  the  bishops  were  often  in- 
clined to  be  too  little  suspicious  towards 
those,  who  became  Christians  from  ex- 
ternal motives.  But  it  is  by  no  means  so 
improbable,  that  a  bishop  in  these  un- 
happy times  of  the  Church,  M'hen  he  saw 
before  him  a  man  who  had  been  so  vio- 
lent an  enemy  to  Christianity,  should 
fear  in  him  an  evil-minded  informer. 
And  then,  in  order  to  destroy  his  doubts 
at  once,  Arnobius  shows  him  his  writing 
in  defence  of  Christianity.  He  himself 
thus  speaks  of  the  change  that  Avas  ef- 
fected in  him  by  Christianity  :*  "  Oh, 
blindness !  it  is  not  long  ago,  that  I  wor- 
shipped even  the  images  that  came  from 

•  Lib.  i.  c.  39. 


ROMISH   CHURCH.  429 

the  forje,  tlie  goils  that  were  made  on  it  was  the  very  accusation  which  had  oc- 
the  anvil  and  by  the  liammer;  when  I  casioncd  the  perserulions  under  Diorle- 
saw  a  stone  that  had  been  polished  and  ^  lian  ;  namelv,  the  public  calamities  \s  liich 
besmeared  with  oil,  I  testified  my  venera-  ;  took  place,  because  tlie  reverence  for  the 
tion,  I  addressed  it  as  if  a  living  power  i  gods  had  been  supplanted  by  Chiis- 
had  been  there,  and  I  begged  for  benefits  i  tianity,  and  hence  protection  and  aiil 
for  myself  from  the  insentient  stone,  and  were  no  longer  afTonled  by  these  gods. 
I  even  did  the  gods,  whom  I  took  to  be  Arnobius  justiy  says  in  reply  to  this 
gods,  the  injury  of  believing  them  to  be  charge  :  "  If  men,  instead  of  trusting  to 
wood,  or  stone,  or  bones,  or  I  thought :  their  own  wisdom  and  following  their 
that  they  dwelt  in  such  things.  Now,  own  opinion,  would  only  endeavour  to 
as  I  have  been  led  on  the  way  of  truth  follow  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  which 
by  so  great  a  teacher,  I  know  what  all  ^  bring  salvation  and  peace,  how  soon 
that  is.""  j  would  the  form  of  the  world  be  changed, 

As  far  as  relates  to  the  period,  at  which  and  iron,  instead  of  being  required  for 
Arnobius  wrote  his  book,  he  himself  de-  war,  would  be  used  in  peaceful  works  !" 
termines  it,  when    he  says,*  that   Rome 

had  been  built  1050  years,  or  not  much  However  important  the  Roman  Church 
less.  According  to  the  (era  Varroniana,  became  by  its  outward  ecclesiastical  influ- 
then  in  vogue,  (Rome  built,  753,)  this  ence,  and  by  the  influence  of  the  element 
would  tally  with  the  year  A.  D.  297.  of  the  Roman  political  spirit  upon  llie  pro- 
But  this  is  not  entirely  satisfactory,  be- [  gress  of  the  Church,  it  was  proportionably 
cause  there  are  in  the  work  evident  traces  poor  from  the  beginning  in  regard  to  theo- 
of  those  persecutions  under  Diocletian, '  logical  attainments.  The  anxiety  for  the 
Avhich  did  not  break  out  (see  above)  be-  ,  outward  existence  of  the  Church,  which 
fore  the  year  A.  D.  303.  We  must,  there-  predominated  here,  appears  early  to  have 
fore,  suppose,  either  that  Arnobius  has  i  depressed  the  scale  of  theological  know- 
made  use  of  an  era  different  from  the  j  ledge.  Only  two  distinguisiied  writers 
usual  one  of  that  day,  or  that  the  exact ;  appear  among  the  Roman  clergy,  neither 
number  did  not  occur  to  him,t  or  that  he  of  whom,  perhaps,  can  be  compared  with 
wrote  the  work  at  different  times.  He  a  Tertullian,  a  Clement,  or  an  Origen ; 
says  to  the  heathen  :t  "  If  a  pious  zeal  |  they  are  the  Presbyter  Caius,  whom  we 
for  your  religion  animated  you,  you  Avould  have  already  named  as  an  opponent  of 
far  rather  have  long  ago  burnt  those  writ- ^  the  Montanists,  and  the  Presbyter  Nova- 
ings,  and  destroyed  those  theatres,  in  tian,  also  mentioned  before.  Of  the  writ- 
which  the  disgrace  of  the  gods  is  daily  i  ings  of  the  first,  nothing  has  been  pre- 
published  in  scandalous  plays.  For,  [  served  to  us ;  of  the  second,  we  have 
wherefore  have  our  writings  deserved  to  |  only  short  expositions  of  the  essential 
be  delivered  up  to  the  fire  ?  wherefore  :  meaning  of  the  Christian  doctrmes ;  es- 
have  our  assembling  houses  deserved  to  '  pecially  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Divinity 
be  destroyed,  in  which  the  Supreme  God  ,  of  Christ,  and  of  the  Trinity.  According 
is  adored,  peace  and  grace  are  implored  for  I  to  Jerome,  §  70,  this  work  was  an  ex- 
governors,  for  the  armies,  for  the  emperors,  j  tract  from  a  greater  one  of  Tertullian. 
—joy  and  peace  are  implored  for  the  living  {But  at  all  events,  this  writer  was  some- 
and  for  those  freed  from  the  fetters  of  the  j  tiling  more  than  a  mere  copyist  of  an- 
body, — in  which  nothing  is  ever  heard,  j  other  man's  mind,  we  should  far  rather 
but 'what  tends  to  make  men  humane, ;  say  that  he  showed  a  character  of  his 
mild,  discreet,  modest,  generous  in  giving  |  own  ;  he  had  not  the  power  and  depth  of 
of  their  own,  and  akin  to  all  those,  whom  Tertullian,  but  a  more  spiritual  disposi- 
the  one  bond  of  brotherhood  embraces  .'"  |  tion.* 

The  objection  also  of  the  heathen  We  have  also  a  treatise  by  him  on  the 
against  Christianity,  which  moved  Arno-  I  Jewish  Imcs  about,  fnod^  a  paronomastic 
bius  to  write  (as  he  himself  says,)  indi- I  allegorical  interpretation  of  them,  intend- 
cates  the  time    at  which  he  wrote;  forced    to   show,    that  they   are   no   longer 


•  Lib.  ii.  c.  71. 

j-  This  is  the  most  natural  supposition,  for  the 
chronolo<^  of  Arnobius  is  certainly  not  very 
exact;  lor  in  I.  i.  c.  13,  he  says:  trecenti  surit 
anni  ferme,  minus  vel  plus  aliquid,  ex  quo  ccepi- 
mus  esse  Chrintiani. 

t  Lib.  iv.  c.  36. 


•  Novalian's  opponent,  (Cornelius,  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  appears  evidently  (in  Euscb.  vi.  43.)  to 
alluJc  to  this  treatise,  when  he  calls  Novalinn,   o 

m:rn,(;.  This  is  certainly  a  hint,  that  .«uch  a  phc- 
nomenon  was  not  common  among  the  lio/nan 
clergy. 


430 


CLEMENT   OF   ALEXANDRIA. 


binding  upon  Christians*  We  see  from 
this  treatise,  that  it  was  written  by  a 
bishop  separated  from  his  Church  by  the 
persecution,  who  maintained  a  constant 
interchange  of  letters  with  this  Church, 
and  endeavoured  to  preserve  it  from  the 
seductions  offered  to  it  by  heathens,  Jews, 
and  heretics :  every  thing  about  it  an- 
swers well  to  a  Roman  Church,  for  many 
Jews  dwelt  at  Rome.  Only  then,  this 
treatise  can  hardly  have  proceeded  from  a 
Presbyter;  the  author  speaks,  as  only  a 
bishop  could  have  spoken  at  that  time  to 
his  Church.  And  we  know  also  from  the 
letter  of  Cornelius,  that  Novatian  did  not 
remove  from  Rome  during  the  persecution 
under  Decius.  We  must,  therefore,  call 
to  mind  the  relation  between  Novatian 
and  the  Church  which  recognised  him  as 
its  bishop,  and  we  shall  naturally  sup- 
pose that  this  piece  was  written  under 
the  first  persecution  of  Valerius,  (see 
above,)  during  which  so  many  bishops 
were  separated  from  their  Churches. 

There  belonged  also  to  the  Roman 
Church  a  man,  who  deserves  a  conspi- 
cuous place  among  the  Apologists  of  this 
age  for  his  sensible,  ingenious,  and 
graphic  dialogue,  animated  throughout  by 
genuine  Christian  feeling,  and  taken  from 
the  life, — I  mean  Minucius  Felix,  who, 
according  to  Jerome,  was  celebrated  as 
an  advocate  at  Rome,  before  his  conver- 
sion to  Christianity  ;  he  lived  apparently 
in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century,  but 
before  Cyprian^  who  made  use  of  his 
writings.  We  have  already  quoted  some 
portion  of  this  Apologetic  dialogue  under 
the  name  of  Octavius. 

We  now  pass  to  the  teachers  of  the 
Alexandrian  school,  of  whose  influence 
over  the  progress  of  the  development  of 
the  Church  we  have  already  spoken. 
We  have  no  written  monument  of  him, 
who  is  named  to  us  as  the  first  teacher 
of  this  school  who  was  held  in  much  es- 
timation, Pantfenus  (nai-TaiKj?,)  the  Phi- 
losopher, wlio  was  converted  to  Chris- 
tianity. We  know  him  oidy  through  his 
s^cholar,  Clement. 

Titus  Flavins  Clemens  was  arrived  at 
the  age  of  manhood  before  he  became  a 
Christian  ;  for  he  numbers  himself  among 


*  Jerome  mentions  this  as  one  of  hh  writings, 
as  well  as  two  others,  on  the  Sabbath  and  on 
Circumcision,  which  Novatian  quotes  as  two  let- 
ters, that  had  preceded  tliis  letter  to  his  Church,  in 
which  he  had  hccn  desirous  of  showing  qua;  sit 
vera  circumcisio,  et  quod  vcrum  sabbatum. 


those  who  came  from  the  service  of  sin 
in  heathenism  to  the  Redeemer,  and  re- 
ceived from  him  forgiveness  of  their  sins.* 
He  persuaded  himself  of  the  truth  of 
Christianity  by  a  free  inquiry,  as  he  was 
one  who  had  attained  a  great  knowledge 
of  all  the  systems  of  religion  and  philo- 
sophy about  Divine  matters,  that  were 
known  to  the  more  cultivated  world  of 
his  days.f  This  free  spirit  of  inquiry, 
which  had  brought  him  to  Christianity, 
impelled  him  also,  after  he  became  a 
Christian,  to  seek  out  distinguished  Chris- 
tian teachers  of  different  characters  of 
mind  in  different  countries.  He  himself 
says,J  that  he  had  several  distinguished 
men  for  his  teachers ;  in  Greece  an 
Ionian  ;  in  Magna  Grajcia  (the  lower  part 
of  Italy,)  one  from  Coelesyria,  and  an- 
other from  Egypt;  in  the  east  of  Asia 
(probably  Syria,)  an  Assyrian,  and  in  Pa- 
lestine a  person  of  Jewish  origin.  He 
remained  at  last  in  Egypt,  where  he  found 
the  greatest  Gnostic*  who  had  penetrated 
most  deeply  into  the  spirit  of  Scripture. 
This  last  was  no  other  than  Panta;nus. 
Eusebius  does  not  confine  himself  to  this 
statement,  but  be  appeals§  to  a  passage 
also  in  the  Hypotvposeis  of  Clement, 
where  he  calls  him  his  teacher.  Perhaps, 
when  Pantfenus  entered  upon  the  mis- 
sionary journey  mentioned  above,  Cle- 
mei\t  followed  him  in  the  character  of  a 
catechist,  and  at  the  same  time,  or  later, 
was  a  presbyter  in  the  Alexandrian 
Church.  The  persecution  under  Sep- 
timius  Severus,  A.  D.  202,  probably  com- 
pelled him  to  absent  himself  from  Alex- 
andria.lt  But  great  obscurity  envelopes 
the  history  of  his  life,  and  tlie  place  of 
his  abode  at  this  period.  We  only  know, 
that  in  the  beginning' of  the  reign  of  the 
Emperor  Caracalla  he  was  at  Jerusalem, 
whither  at  that  time  many  Christians, 
especially  clergy,  had  been  accustomed 
to  betake  themselves,  partly  in  order  to 
become  eye-witnesses  of  places  sanctified 
by  religious  remembrances,  and  partly  in 
order  to  make  use  of  a  more  accurate 
knowledge  of  these  places  for  the  better 
undersLinding  of  Scripture.  Alexander, 
tlie  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  who  was  then 
imprisoned  for  the  faith,  commen(kHl  him 
to  the  Church  at  Antioch,  whither  he  was 
travelling,  by  a  letter,  in  which  he  called 


•  Pa;dagog.  1.  ii.  c.  8.  p.  176.  [Pott.  205. 
Sylb.76.]  • 

■j"  TravTav  S'tt  TTit^xi;  i\Baiv  ^vwg.  Euscl).  Prae- 
parat.  Evangel.  1.  ii.'c.  2. 

+   Stromat.  1.  i.  274.     [Pott.  323.     Sylb.  118.] 

§  vi.  13.  i  Euseb,  vi.  c.  3. 


Tr^uy-xra — 

him  a  virtuous  and  approved  man,  and 
took  it  for  granted,  that  he  was  already 
known  to  the  Antiochians.* 

We  have  three  u'orks  written  hy  him, 
and  dependent  in  some  sort  on  each 
oilier;  because  he  sets  out  from  the  idea, 
tliat  the  instructor  of  mankind,  tlie  Logos, 
first  leads  the  rude  heathens,  sunk  in  sin 
and  idolatry,  to  believe,  (hen  continually 
improves  their  lives  by  moral  precepts, 
and  lastly,  elevates  those  who  had  been 
purified  in  morals  to  a  deeper  knowledge 
of  Divine  matters,  i.  e.  to  Gnosis.  Thus 
the  Logos  appears,  at  first  exhorting  the 
sinner  to  repentance  and  converting  the 
heathens,  (Tr^oT/jjTTTif.o;,)  next  as  forming 
by  his  discipline  the  conduct  of  the  con- 
verted, (w«»^«7W7o,-,)  and  then  as  the 
teacher  of  the  Gnosis  to  the  purified."!" 
His  tliree  works,  which  we  still  have,  are 
formed  on  this  fundamental  notion,  the 
Apologetic  work,  the  Protrepticos,  next 
the  ethical  work,  the  Pa;dagogus,  and 
then  the  work  containing  the.  elements  of 
Gnosis,  the  ST^wfA«T£K  {'ZTpuiiJt.a.Tci.)^  Cle- 
ment was  not  a  man  of  a  systematic 
mind ;  many  multifarious  elements  of 
mind  and  ideas,  which  he  had  received 
from  his  intercourse  with  minds  of  varied 
character,  were  heaped  up  in  him,  as  one 
sees  at  times  in  his  Stromata,  and  as  must 
have  been  shown  still  more  strongly  in  his 
Hypotyposeis,  which  we  shall  have  to 
mention  hereafter,  if  Photius  has  under- 
stood him  properly.  It  is  beyond  doubt 
that  by  isolated  flashes  of  mind  he  must 
have  exercised  an  animating  influence  on 
his  disciples  and  his  readers,  as  we  see 
particularly  shown  in  the  case  of  Origen. 
Many  ideas  unconnectedly  thrown  out  by 
him,  in  a  manner  full  of  the  loftiest  con- 
ceptions,— ideas  which  contain  the  germ 
of  a  complete  and  systematic  theological 
course  of  thought,  are  found  in  him  scat- 
tered among  a  multitude  of  insignificant 
discussions. 

As  far  as  regards  his  ZT§«/AaT«,  it  was 
here,  nevertheless,  his  intention,  as  he 
testifies  in  many  places,  to  place  togetlier 
confusedly  truth  and  error  from  the 
Greek  philosopliers  and  the  systems  of 
Christian  sects,  as  well  as  fragments  of 
the  true  Gnosis.  Every  one  was  to  find 
out  that  which  was  adapted  to  himself; 


"i-TfcnvTrm/Tn;. 


431 


♦  Euseb.  vi.  c.  11. 

•Ivynv  fuvxy.tiM  ^(TfirTdu  my    dTroxaxu^/i'  r:v  A'.y.u. 
Paediigog.  1.  i.e.  1. 

t  Just  like  the  xta-roc,  a  word  of  similar  import, 
which  was  commonly  used  to  denote  a  work  of 
mixed  contents. 


he  wished  rather  to  excite  than  to  teach, 
and  often  pmposcly  only  to  give  a  liiiit  in 
those  cases  wliere  he  might  fear  to  give 
oflence  to  the  vria-Tixoi,  who  were  as  yet 
unable  to  comprehend  these  ideas.  Tlie 
eighth  book  of  this  work  is  lost;  for  the 
fragment  of  (halectic  investigations,  which 
now  goes  under  the  name  of  the  eighth 
book  of  the  Stromata,  evidently  does  not 
belong  to  this  work,  hideed,  the  eighth 
book  was  lost  as  early  as  the  time  of 
Photius.* 

AVe  have  to  regret  the  loss  of  the 
'T'7roTV'!ru<7n;i  of  Clement,  in  which  appa- 
rently he  gave  doctrinal  and  excLn-iiral 
investigations  and  views  on  tlie  ])riiiriph^8 
of  the  Alexandrian  Gnosis.  Fragments 
from  this  work,  tfie  short  explanations  of 
some  of  the  Catholic  Epistles,  wliich 
have  descended  to  us  in  the  Latin  trans- 
]ation,Jan(l  perhaps,  also,  the  frairment  of 
the  fKX«ya»  fK  Tuv  VfotpririKiLt^  belong  to 
this  class.  The  fact  is,  that  people  made 
for  themselves  extracts  out  of  the  larger 
work  for  common  use  on  difll'ient  parts 
of  Scripture,  and  some  of  these  extnicts 
have  been  preserved  to  us,  while  this  verv 
custom  may  have  contributed  to  eflect  the 
loss  of  the  whole  work. 

Obscure  as  it  is  in  its  nature,  the 
fragment  of  the  extracts  from  the  writings 
of  Theodotns  and  of  the  StSxcxct>.t(x  utx- 
ToXix»),  (that  is,  of  the  Theosopliic  doc- 
trines of  Eastern  Asia,)  which  has 
remained  to  us  among  the  works  of 
Clement,  is  of  the  highest  importance  for 
the  knowledge  of  the  Gnostic  systems. 
It  is,  perhaps,  a  fragment  of  a  critical 
collection,  which  Clement  had  made 
during  his  sojourn  in  Syria.  We  have 
already  spoken  of  the  treatise  of  Cle- 
ment on  the  time  of  Easter,§  and  of  his 
work  TK  0  a-ul^outtoi;  nrXova-KJi;,  which  is  of 
itnportance  in  regard  to  the  history  of 
Christian  Ethics. 

Clement,  in  his  Stromata. ||  intimates 
his  intention  of  writing  a  work,  vifi  itfo- 
iptjTiia?,  in  which  he  would  treat  of  the 
nature  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  on  the 
mode  of  his  comnnmiration,  as  well  as 
of  the  proper  judgment  to  be  made  about 

•  See  Cod.  111. 

■|-  This  word  wonld  prolulily  Im  l>est  traiislatod 
thus:  sketches,  shadows,  Rfncral  outlines,  ivu- 
firius  trans!iil»^s  it,  adumhralionps. 

\   See  the  second  volume  of  Potter's  edilion. 

§  The  writiiii?  also  which  Euseliius  quotes 
under  the  title,  Kifav  i«jtX)i«<TT5c  i!  Tjsf  TMt 
'iwSaj^ivTtf.  was  on  a  similar  Huhjeel. 

II  L.  iv.  511.  [Pott,  605.  Sylb.  UIO.]  v.  591. 
[Pott.  699.  Sylb.  252. 


432 


ORIGEN — HIS    EDUCATION. 


the  Montanistic  prophets.  As  the  subject 
of  this  work  involves  so  important  and 
interesting  a  portion  of  the  doctrinal  con- 
troversies of  his  day,  and  as  we  might 
expect  from  Clement  a  more  unpreju- 
diced and  moderate  judgment  of  the 
Montanists  than  from  any  other  man  of 
those  times,  we  have  liad  a  very  great 
loss  in  losing  this  work,  if  he  really  car- 
ried into  execution  his  intention  of 
writing  it..* 

Origen,  who  bore  also  the  additional 
name  of  J]damantios,i  was  born  at  Alex- 
andria, A.  D.  185.  It  is  of  importance, 
in  regard  to  his  ethication,  to  remark,  that 
his  lather  Leonides,  a  pious  Christian, 
and  probably  a  rhetorician,  was  in  cir- 
cumstances to  give  him  a  good  literary, 
as  well  as  a  Christian  and  pious  educa- 
tion. Both  had  an  abiding  influence  on 
the  disposition  of  his  interior  life,  the 
development  of  his  intellect  and  of  his 
heart  went  side  by  side  with  him,  and 
progressed  together,  and  the  longing  after 
truth  and  holiness  remained  as  the  influ- 
ential dispositions  of  his  life.  We  have 
before  observed,  that  the  Bible  then  M'as 
not  reserved  exclusively  for  the  study  of 
the  clergy,  but  that  it  was  used  also  as  a 
book  for  family  edification ;  and  we  see 
in  the  case  of  Origen,  that  a  judicious 
use  was  made  of  it  also  in  education,  as 
well  as  the  wholesome  consequences  of 
such  a  custom.  Leonides  taught  his  son 
daily  to  learn  by  heart  a  portion  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures.  The  boy  took  great 
pleasure  in  this,  and  his  deeply  inquiring 
spirit  soon  showed  itself.  Not  contented 
with  the  explanation  of  the  literal  mean- 
ing, which  his  father  gave  him,  he  de- 
sired to  have  his  inquiries  about  the 
intention  of  the  passages  he  learnt  by 
heart  resolved ;  so  that  his  father  often 
found  himself  in  difficulties  from  this 
cause.  He  blamed,  however,  his  curiosity, 
and  advised  him  to  content  himself,  as  it 
became  his  age,  with  the  literal    sense ; 


*  If  vi.  681,  a,  [Pott.  808.  Sylb.  289.]  Six  w 

TiK'.v  Uiujua.,  he  compared  with  iv.  591,  it  might 
be  concluded,  although  not  with  certainty,  that 
Clement,  in  the  work  which  is  lost,  denied  the 
personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

•j-  If  this  name  was  given  to  him  after  his  death, 
yet  we  must  not  follow  the  forced  interpretation 
of  it  in  Photius,  c.  118,  'because  fhe  proofs  of 
Origen  were  like  bonds  of  adamant'  but  far 
rather  that  of  Jerome,  that  it  was  given  to  him 
from  his  iron  industry,  as  we  often  say,'  und 
thence  he  was  also  named  juvnx.TK,  and  ^AkMy- 
T-egcc.  Eusebius,  however,  appears  to -quote  this 
name  as  one  which  Origen  bore  from  his  birth. 


but  in  secret  he  delighted  himself  with 
the  promising  abilities  of  his  son,  and 
thanked  God  with  a  grateful  heart,  tliat 
he  had  given  him  such  a  son.  Often, 
when  his  son  lay  asleep  Avith  his  bosom 
bare,  would  he  kiss  that  breast,  as  a 
teiuple  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
wilHng  to  prepare  himself  an  habitation, 
and  he  tliought  himself  happy  to  possess 
such  a  son. 

The  trait,  which  we  have  mentioned, 
of  the  early  life  of  Origen,  teaches  us  to 
recognise  in  him,  even  at  that  age,  the 
mind  that  sought  the  overpowering  spirit 
in  tlie  earthly  guise, — a  mind  which  after- 
wards plainly  showed  itself  in  his  allego- 
rical mode  of  Scripture  interpretation,  and 
which,  had  it  been  accompanied  by  sound 
and  well  informed  judgment,  and  been  an 
enlivening  spirit  grafted  on  a  grammatical 
education,  might  have  made  of  him  a 
well-grounded  and  profound  interpreter 
of  Scripture.  This  mind  was  rather  re- 
pressed than  encouraged  by  his  father. 
But  if  Origen  had  been  early  determined 
by  the  influence  of  the  theological  school 
of  Alexandria  in  regard  to  his  intellectual 
and  spiritual  character,  this  mind  must 
soon  have  found  encouragement,  and 
have  completed  its  own  formation.  As 
we  afterwards  learn  to  know  Origen  from 
his  own  writings,  the  influence  M'hich 
Clement  had  exerted  on  his  theological 
development  is  undeniably  shown  most 
conspicuously;  we  find  in  him  the  pre- 
dominant ideas  of  the  latter  systematically 
developed.  Now  it  is  certain*  that,  as  a 
boy,  he  was  at  least  a  scholar  of  Clement 
as  a  Catechist.f  But  a  youthful  impa- 
tience in  Origen  (on  which  we  shall  here- 
after touch,)  proceeding  from  a  carnal  and 


*  According  to  Eusebius,  vi.  6. — Alexander, 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  who  either  originally 
came  from  Alexandria,  or  had  been  thither  in  his 
youth,  in  order  to  receive  the  instruction  of  the 
Catechists  there,  appears  in  his  letter  to  Origen  to 
hint  that  he  had  been  in  the  habit  of  intercourse 
with  Pantanus,  although  he  does  not  directly  say 
that  he  was  his  disciple .  "  We  acknowledge  as 
our  Fathers  those  blessed  men,  who  have  gone 
before  us,  Pantfcnus  and  Clement,  who  was  my 
master,  and  was  of  service  to  me,  and  who  be- 
longs to  these  men,  through  ivhoin  I  became  ac- 
quainted with  you."  Euscb.  vi.  14.  Unfortu- 
nately, however,'  there  is  an  obscurity  spread  over 
the  early  influence  of  these  men  on  the  formation 
of  Origcn's  character,  which,  from  a  deficiency  of 
documents,  we  cannot  remove. 

+  We  may  conclude  from  this  passage  of  Euse- 
bius, that  the  Alexandrian  Catechists  not  only 
gave  private  instruction  in  religion  to  licathen 
adults,  but  also  public  religious  instruction  to 
Christian  children. 


CONDUCT   OF    ORIGEN    1\    PERSECUTION. 


433 


literal  interpretation  of  Scripture,  shows  i  Leonides  sudered  martvrdoin ;  and  his 
that  in  his  youth  he  was  yet  far  from  j  properly  being  conliscated,  lie  lefi  ht  liiiul 
that,  liis  later  theological  turn  of  mind;  I  him  a  helpless  widow  with  six  children, 


and  he  himself  says  of  himself,  while  he    none  of  whom,  except  Origen,  were  grown 

"up.    He  found  a  friendly  reception  in  the 


calls  to  mind  this  fault  of  his  youtti,  '^  1 
who  once  knew  Christ,  the  Divine  Logos 
only  after  tiie  flesh  and  the  letter,  now 
know  him  no  longer  in  this  way."*  It  is 
clear  from  lliis,  that  the  education  of  his 
father  had  more  influence  on  the  first 
religious   character   of  Origen,  than   the 


house  of  a  rich  and  well-esteemed  Chris- 
tian lady  of  Alexandria.  A  characteristic 
trait  here  showed  his  firmness  in  that 
which  he  acknowledged  as  the  true  faith, 
and  how  he  prized  it  above  all  besides, 
lis  patroness  had  devoted  herself  to  one 


instruction  of  Clement;  and  that  tlic  in- Of  those  Gnostics,  who  came  so  com- 
fluence  of  the  Alexandrian  theological  monly  out  of  Syria  to  Alexandria,  and 
spirit  on  him  belongs  to  a  later  period  of  there  propagated  their  systems,  dressed 
his  life,  when  his  character  was  more  de- ,  up  after  the  Alexandrian  fashion, — one 
veloped.  We  freely  confess,  that  in  the  Paulus  of  Antioch.  She  had  received 
history  of  the  formation  of  his  mind  iiiin  as  a  son,  and  allowed  him  to  deliver 
there  is  much  obscurity,  which  we  are  lectures  in  her  house,  which  were  fre- 
unable  entirely  to  dissipate,  from  want  of  quented  not  only  by  the  friends  of  Gnos- 
historical  documents.  The  religion  of  ticism  in  Alexandria,  but  also  by  those 
the  heart  was  at  iirst  the  predominant  |  of  the  orthodox,  who  were  constantly 
one  with  Origen.  desirous  of  learning  something  new.  The 

The  persecution  which  raged  against  |  young  Origen,  however,  did  not  allow 
the  Christians  in  Egypt,  under  the  em- i  respect  for  his  patroness  to  withhold  him 
peror  Septimius  Severus  (see  above,)  gave  from  speaking  out  freely  his  abhorrence 
an  opportunity  to  him,  then  a  stripling  I  of  the  Gnostic  doctrines,  and  nothing 
of  sixteen,  of  showing  his  faith  and  zeal,  j  could  induce  him  to  frequent  these  as- 
The  example  of  the  martyrs  carried  him  \  semblies,   because  he  would  tlien   have 


away,  and  induced  him  to  wish  to  declare 
himself  a  Christian  before  the  heathen 
governor,  and  thus  expose  himself  to 
death.  Such  was  the  feeling  of  the  high- 
spirited  and  ardent  young  Christian ;  but 
the  reasonable  and  soundly-informed  man, 
who  better  understood  the  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  the  doctrines  and  example  of 
Christ,  judged  otherwise.!     "  A  tempta- 


been  obliged  to  join  in  the  prayers  of  this 
Gnostic,  and  thus  to  testify  his  concur- 
rence with  him  in  matters  of  faith. 

He  was  soon  able  to  release  himself 
from  this  state  of  dependence;  his  know- 
ledge of  the  Greek  language  and  litera- 
ture, which  he  had  improved  still  more 
after  the  death  of  his  father,  put  him  into 
a  condition  at  Alexandria,   wliere    such 


tion,  which  comes  upon  us  without  our .  knowledge  was  peculiaily  prized,  to  gain 
own  co-operation,"  he  says,  in  touching  I  his  livelihood  by  instruction  in  these 
on  this  matter,  "  we  must  sustain  with   subjects. 

courage  and  with  patience,  but  it  is  use-  As  he  had  made  himself  known  even 
less,  when  we  can  avoid  it,  not  to  do  so."  among  the  heathens  by  his  knowledge 
As  the  father  of  Origen  was  thrown  into  and  intellectual  endowments,  by  his  zeal 
prison,  the  son  felt  himself  still  more  for  the  things  of  the  Gospel,  and  by  his 
strongly  urged  to  join  his  father  in  death.J  ;  pure  and  strict  life,  and  as  the  oflice  of  a 
As  all  arguments  and  entreaties  had  proved  Catcchist  was  vacant  at  Alexandria  in  con- 
fruitless,  his  mother  was  unable  to  retain  j  sequence  of  the  persecution,  many  hea- 
liim  in  any  other  way  than  by  hiding  his  thens  who  were  desirous  of  instruction  in 
clothes.  The  love  of  Christ  now  so  com- ,  Christianity  applied  to  him,  and  by  this 
pletely  overwhelmed  all  other  feelings  stripling  those  were  brought  to  Chris- 
within  him,  that  when  he  found  himself  tianity,  who  afterwards  distinguished 
prevented  in  his  first  intention,  of  sharing  themselves  as  martyrs,  or  as  teachers  of 
the  imprisonment  and  death  of  his  father,  the  Church.  By  this  activity  of  his  in 
he  wrote  to  him  thus:  "Take  care  that  the  propagation  of  Christianity,  he  must 
thou  changest  not  thy  mind  for  our  have  constantly  attracted  to  himself  more 
sakes."  and  more  the  hatred  of  the  fanatical  mul- 

titude,  especially  as  he,  without  regarding 

his  own  danger,  showed  such  sympathy 
towards  those  who  were  imprisoned  for 
faith,  that  he  not  only  visited  them  fre- 
quently in  their  dungeons,  but  accorapa- 
20 


Matth. 

TCKA'.7c: 


Ed.   Huct.  f.  369.  HjutK  St 


*  T.  XV. 

j  He  appeals  to  MaUh.  xiv.  13;  x.  23. 
t  InMalth.  f.  23J. 

55 


434 


nied  them  to  execution,  and  even  in  the 
face  of  death  encouraged  them  by  the 
strength  of  his  faith  and  his  love.  Provi- 
dence often  saved  him  from  imminent 
danger  of  his  life,  when  sokliers  had  sur- 
rounded the  house  in  which  he  was 
dwelling,  and  he  was  obliged  to  betake 
himself  secretly  from  one  house  to  an- 
other. Once  a  crowd  of  heathens  seized 
him,  put  upon  him  the  dress  of  a  heathen 
priest  of  Serapis,  and  led  him  in  this  dress 
to  the  steps  of  the  temple,  and  then 
gave  him  palm-branches,  that  he  might 
distribute  them,  after  the  usual  manner, 
to  those  who  were  entering  into  the 
temple.  Origen  said  to  those,  to  whom 
he  offered  the  palm-branches,  "  Receive, 
not  the  palm  of  the  heathen  gods,  but  the 
palm  of  Christ."* 

These  effective  exertions  of  Origen  in 
the  communication  of  religious  instruc- 
tion called  the  attention  of  Demetrius, 
bishop  of  Alexandria,  to  him,  and  moved 
him  to  bestow  on  Origen  the  office  of  a 
Catechist  in  the  Alexandrian  Church.  At 
that  time,  however,  no  salary  was  at- 
tached to  this  office^  and  as  he  now 
■wished  to  be  able  to  devote  himself  en- 
tirely to  the  duties  of  his  spiritual  calling, 
and  his  theological  studies,  without  being 
interrupted  and  called  away  by  other  em- 
ployments, and  as  he  was  nevertheless 
desirous  that  he  should  be  dependent  on 
no  one  for  his  support,  he  sold  a  collec- 
tion of  beautiful  manuscripts  of  old  au- 
thors, which  he  had  been  at  much  pains 
to  make  for  himself,  to  a  lover  of  litera- 
ture, who  was  to  pay  him  for  this  library 
four  oboli  daily  for  many  years.  This 
must  have  been  sufficient  for  the  very 
limited  personal  wants  of  Origen,  for  he 
led  the  same  kind  of  life  as  the  strictest 
among  the  ascetics.  He  was,  as  we  be- 
fore observed,  then  devoted  to  a  literal 
interpretation  of  Scripture;  and,  as  he 
was  actuated  by  a  serious  and  sacred  zeal 
to  act  up  to  the  ideal  of  holiness  set  forth 
by  our  Saviour,  and  endeavoured  with 
conscientious  fidelity  to  apply  to  himself 
all  the  words  of  that  Saviour,  he  must,  in 


ORIGEN   AN   ASCETIC. 


*  See  Epiphan.  H.  64.  This  narrative  may 
certainly,  taken  by  itself,  appear  to  he  iniprolnihle, 
when  we  remember  how  such  an  adilress  must 
have  excitetl  the  fanatical  rage  of  the  Alexandrian 
multitude,  and  when  we  take  into  account  the 
untrustvvorthinoss  of  E})i[ihanius.  But  the  first  of 
these  circumstances,  althoujih  it  may  excite  a 
doubt,  is  no  decisive  arj^ument,  and  Epiphanius  is 
entitled  to  more  credit  when  he  repeats  any  thing 
which  tells  to  the  advantage  of  one  reputed  to  be 
a  heretic 


the  warmth  of  his  youthful  ascetic  zeal, 
which  was  not  accompanied  by  a  sound 
and  judicious  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
have  been  led  into  many  practical  errors, 
where  he  understood  literally  the  figura- 
tive expressions  of  Christ,  or  maintained 
as  applicable  to  all  times  and  circum- 
stances, tliat  which  Christ  had  said  only 
in  reference  to  particular  circumstances. 
The  most  remarkable  error  of  this  kind, 
which  afterwards  attracted  much  odium 
to  him,  was  that  he  was  induced,  by  a 
literal  interpretation  of  the  passage  in 
Matth.  xix.  ]2,  to  practise  in  his  own 
case  what  he  believed  prescribed  by  these 
words  to  those,  who  wished  to  be  quite 
certain  of  admission  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  It  was  a  mistake  which  might 
easily  arise  from  the  partial  views  of 
asceticism,  and  from  this  kind  of  scrip- 
tural interpretation,  and  which  was  en- 
couraged by  many  writings  then  in  cir- 
culation.* But  through  this  error  there 
still  shines  forth  conspicuously  the  earnest 
desire  of  this  young  man,  so  ardent  in  his 
zeal  for  holiness,  as  well  as  his  intimate 
love  for  the  Redeemer,  whose  every  hint 
he  wished  to  follow  so  literally.  Although, 
however,  such  an  error,  proceeding  as  it 
did  from  that  which  is  most  holy  in  man, 
ought  always  to  be  judged  most  mildly; 
yet  there  are  at  all  times  many,  wiio, 
having  only  one  measure  for  all  things, 
judge  all  eccentric  excesses  of  this  kind 
the  more  harshly,  the  farther  that  prin- 
ciple, from  which  alone  such  entliusiastic 
exaggeration  could  proceed,  lies  from 
their  own  carnal  feelings,  or  their  own 
sobriety  of  intellect.  Origen  speaks  from 
his  own  experience  when  he  speaks  of 
those,  who  by  such  mistakes  and  errors 
have  got  to  themselves  shame  and  re- 
proaches, not   only  among   unbelievers, 


*  Philo,  0pp.  f.  186.  f^ivvm^itrSiivcti  lijuiivov,  » 
TT^OC  iruvoiKriU-i:  ikvo/awi;  Xutthv.  Again,  One  of  the 
sentences  (Gnomai)  of  25|toc  then  very  current 
among  the  Alexandrian  Christians,  No.  12,  (ac- 
cording to  the  translation  of  Kufinus,)  omne  mem- 
brum  corporis,  quod  suadet  tc  contra  pudicitiam 
agerc,  abjicicndum.  These  Gnoniie  certainly  are 
neither  the  production  of  a  Roman  Bishop  Sixtus 
(neither  the  first  nor  the  second,)  as  Kufinus 
thought  them,  nor,  as  .lerome  believed,  (v.  ep.  ad 
Ctesiphon.)  of  a  heathen  Pythagorean,  but  they 
are  the  work  of  some  person,  who  out  of  the  Pla- 
tonic and  (Jnostic  sentiments,  and  by  putting  to- 
gether detached  passages  of  Scripture,  had  formed 
his  own  moriil  code,  the  highest  aim  of  which  was 
d7r«St(5t.  A  moral  code  interpenetrated  by  the 
essential  principles  of  the  Gospel  is  not  to  be 
found  ill  them; — they  consist  of  many  elevated 
sentiments,  joined  with  many  distorted  notions. 


THEOLOGICAL    DEVELOPMENT    OP    ORIGE.V. 


435 


but.  with  those  wlio  would  pardon  every'  T(?rtc/<»^r"  of  philosophical  sciences,  with 


thing  human,  rather  than  such  errors  as 
proceed  from  a  misinformed  fear  of  God, 
and  an  immoderate  desire  after  holiness.* 
Wlien  the  Bishop  Demetrius  was  first 
made  acquainted  WMth  this  circumstance, 
he  honoured  the  intention  even  in  the 
error,  but  he  afterwards  used  this  false 
step  of  Origen  to  his  prejudice. 


whom  Ileracias.  a  convert  made  by  Origen, 
had  passed  five  years.  As  he  here  indi- 
cates the  person,  wiio  was  commonly 
known  at  Aiexanthia  by  the  name  of 
"the  Teacher  of  Philosophy,"  chrono- 
lojTy  naturally  leads  us  to  think  of  the 
ceh'brated  Ammonius  Saccas,  through 
whose    means   the    chaotic    neo-plalonic 


It  would  be  of  sfreat  importance  if  we  eclecticism,  formed   out  of  a   mixture  of 

could  accurately  determine /Af /jwie  iMen,  Greek   and  oriental  elements,  obtained  a 

and  the  mode  in  tchich,  (to   use  the  Ian-  more  defined  and  sctiied  form. — the  nias- 

guage    of   the    Alexandrian    school)    the  ter    of  the  decp-tliinking    Pjotinus.     We 

point  of  transition  from   vtyrn;  to  yvwe-i?  may  add,    that  Porphyry,    in    his    work 


was  effected  in  Origen. 
what  we  have  above  remarked  on  the 
peculiar  character  of  Clement's  mind,  we 
cannot  doubt  that  if  Origen  had  been  a 
scholar  of  Clement  himself,  as  a  Theolo- 


According  to   against  Christianity,  expressly  calls  Ori- 
gen a  scholar  of  this  Ammonius.* 

From  this  time  the  srreat  cliange  in  the 

theological  character  of  Origen  unfolded 

itself.     It  was  now  his  endeavour  to  seek 

gian,  he  w^ould  have  been  incited  by  him   out  the  traces  of  truth  in  all  human  sys- 


from  the  first  to  make  himself  accurately 
acquainted  with  the  systems  of  the  Hel- 
lenic philosophers,  and  of  the  different 
heretics,  as  the  liberal  spirit  of  Alexan- 
drian theology  w^ould  require.     But  ap- 


tems,  to  investigate  every  thing,  in  order 
universally  to  distinguish  falsehood  from 
truth.  His  life  at  Alexandria,  where  so 
many  sects  of  various  kinds  met  together, 
his  journey  to   Rome   (A.  D.  211,)    his 


parently  Origen  had  originally  a  far  more  journeys  to  Palestine  and  about  it,  to 
uncouth  and  a  narrower  turn.  A  literary  Achaia,  and  Cappadocia,  g-ave  him  an  op- 
education  indeed  accompanied  his  ascetic  portunity,  as  he  himself  says,t  every 
zeal  and  his  inward  Christian  life,  but  it  where  to  seek  out  those  who  pretended 
was  unconnected  with  that  which  was  to  any  peculiar  knowledge,  and  to  altxiin  a 
the  animating  principle  of  that  Christian  knowledge  of  their  doctrines,  and  a  means 
life.     He  himself  says,  that  he  was  first ;  of  investigating   them.       It    became    hi 


principle,  not  to  allow  himself  to  be  go- 
verned bv  the  traditional  opinion  of  the 
multitude,  but  to  hold  fast  as  truth  that 
only,  which  he  found  to  be  truth  after  an 
impartial  investigation.  He  expresses  this 
in  the  following  manner,  in  a  practical  ap- 
plication   of  Matt.   xxii.  19,  20.      "  We 


induced  by  an  outward  necessity  to  busy 
himself  with  the  Platonic  philosophy,  and 
generally  to  acquaint  himself  more  accu- 
rately with  the  systems  of  those  who  dif- 
fered from  him,  namely,  because  heretics 
and  philosophically  educated  heathens, 
attracted  by  his  reputation,  sought  him 
for  the  purpose  of  conversation  on  reli-  | 
gious  subjects,  and  he  was  compelled  to  j  ,  p^^  ^^^^  ^^  ^  ^^  ^^^^^  ^^^^  p^  ^  .^ 
give  them  a  reason  of  his  faith,  and  to  re-  ^useb.  vi.  19,  speaks  of  no  otner  than  this  Am- 
fule  their  objections  to  it.  He  expresses  nonius  Saccas, although  Euscliius  confoun.ls  him 
himself  on  the  subject  in  the  following  |  with  Ammonius,  teacher  of  the  Church,  who  wrote 
manner  in  a  letter,  in  which  he  justifies   a  harmony  of  the  Gospels,  which  has  bt>en  pre- 

served,  and  a  book  on  the  Agreement  between 
iMoses  and  Jesus.  At  nearly  the  same  period 
there  were  in  Alexandria  a  hcat/irn  Ammonius, 


himself    for    being    occupied    with     the 

Grecian   philosophy:  "  VVhen   I   had  en-  ^  ^^^  ^  ^    _^  ,..^^,...„ 

tirely  devoted  myself  to  the  preaching  of  j\'^t7n^u4]^^e7amor?'tb^^ 

the  Divine  doctrines,  and   the   reputation  '  ,/wm(H.s  and  Or/^';;i.     When  Porphvrv  elsewhere 


of  my  ability  in  these  things  had  extended 
itself  widely, — and  sometimes  heretics, 
sometimes  persons  who  had  pursued  the 
Hellenic  sciences,  and  especially  men 
from  the  philosophical  schools,  came  to 
me, — then  it  seemed  necessary  for  me  to 
investigate  the  doctrinal  opinions  of  he- 
retics, and  what  the  philosophers  pre- 
tended to  know  of  truth."  He  adds,  that 
he  then  frequented  the  lectures  of  " //te 


T.  XV.  Matth.  §  367. 


says  of  Orii^en :  'E\>^i  t»  'Ekk>,-ti  -rjjJt/iu:  >.i-yoi:, 
rrsiiz  TO  ^t^&%^:i  jfajtsiAi  TiKfxxfxa.  (he  bccjimo  a 
renei-ado,  and  joined  the  religion  of  the  Uarba- 
rians,)  one  part  alone  of  this  account  is  true, 
namely,  ih.it  Origen  had,  from  the  first,  an  educa- 
tion  in  Hellenic  litcrnture ;  but  Porphyry  is  wrong 
in  stating  farther  that  he  was  brought  up  in  lica- 
l/ieiiism,  which  is  notoriously  false.  We  CJinnot 
suppose  that  Porphyry,  who  knew  both  the  per- 
sons who  bore  the  name  of  Origen  should  have 
made  a  confusion  between  the  two. 

-(■  C.  Cels.  vi.  34.  t:\a;u:  iK^t^tt>.ft'.fn: 
Txc  yx:  Kii  Totfc  T*tritp(M/  trx-^yiKKf.iut/o-jt  ti 
^>iT>i<ra.m;. 


TJJTWC 

iiitreu 


436 


HIS    LIBERALITy    AND   MODERATION. 


learn  here  from  our  Saviour  not  to  stand 
under  a  pretence  of  piely  upon  that  which 
is  said  by  the  multitude,  and  is  lield,  there- 
fore, in  great  esteem,  but  upon  that  which 
proceeds  from  investigation,  and  from  the 
internal  connection  of  truth  ;  for  we  must 
remark,  that  when  he  was  asked  whether 
it  was  lawful  to  give  tribute  to  Caesar  or 
not,  he  did  not  simply  express  his  opinion, 
but  saying,  '  Show  me  the  tribute-money,' 
he  inquired  '  whose  the  image  and  super- 
scription was ;'  and  when  they  said  that 
'  they  were  Caesar's,'  he  answered,  that 
they  must  render  unto  Cajsar  the  things 
that  are  Cffisar's,  and  not  defraud  him, 
under  the  pretence  of  piety,  of  that  which 
was  his  due.'  "*  Hence  comes  the  mild- 
ness with  which  he  could  judge  of  those 
who  are  in  error,  as  he  expresses  himself 
in  this  beautiful  remark  on  St.  John  xiii. 
8.  "  It  is  clear  that,  although  Peter  said 
this  with  a  good  and  reverential  feeling 
towards  the  Master,  he  said  it  still  to  his 
own  shame.  Life  is  full  of  this  kind  of 
sins,  which  happen  to  those  who  wish 
indeed  to  be  right  in  their  faith,  but  out 
of  ignorance  say,  or  even  do,  that  which 
leads  to  the  very  contrary.  Such  are 
those  who  say  '  touch  not,  taste  not,  han- 
dle not't     Coloss.  ii.  21,  22 

But  what  shall  we  say  of  those,  who  in 
sects  are  driven  about  by  every  wind  of 
doctrine,  who  call  that  which  is  destruc- 
tive holy,  and  who  make  to  themselves 
false  representations  of  the  person  of 
Jesus,  in  order,  as  they  think,  to  honour 
him  ?"J 

By  means  of  this  liberality  Origen  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  back  many  heretics, 
whom  he  met  at  Alexandria,  especially 
Gnostics,  to  the  simple  doctrines  of  the 
Gospel.  A  remarkable  instance  of  this  is 
lurnished  by  the  case  of  Ambrose,  a  rich 
man  at  Alexandria,  who  being  dissatisfied 
by  the  manner  in  which  Christianity  was 
presented  to  him  in  tlie  ordinary  exposi- 
tions of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  had 
sought  and  fancied  that  he  had  found 
a  more  spiritual  conception  of  Christianity 
among  the  Gnostics,  until  he  was  unde- 
ceived by  the  influence  of  Origen,  and  re- 
joiced to  find  in  that  teacher  the  true 
Gnosis  joined  with  failh.§  He  became 
now  the  most  zealous  friend  of  Origen, 


*  c.  Matt.  f.  4  S3. 

I  [There  is  an  omission  here  of  two  cr  three 
lines  of  the  original — H.  J.  K.] 

■i  In  Joh.  xxxii.  §  5.  [vol.  ii.  p.  380,  381.  Ed. 
Iluet.] 

§  See  the  words  addressed  to  Ainbrosius,  I'om. 
Evang.  Joh.  p.  99,  as  cited  above. 


and  endeavoured  particularly  to  forward 
his  literary  labours  for  the  advantage  of 
the  Church. 

If  Origen,  after  having  learnt  from  his 
own  experience  the  errors  of  a  carnal  and 
literal  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  the 
disadvantageous  consequences  resulting- 
from  it,  passed  over  to  the  other  error  of 
an  arbitrary  allegorizing  mode  of  expla- 
nation, he  deserves  on  that  account  the 
greater  esteem  for  his  earnest  and  consci- 
entious endeavours  to  use  all  the  means 
of  assistance,  which  could  serve  to  re- 
store the  letter  of  Holy  Writ  to  its  ori- 
ginal condition,  and  to  understand  it  accu- 
rately. For  this  purpose,  after  arriving 
at  the  years  of  manhood,  he  learnt  the 
Hebrew  language,  which  must  have  been 
difficult  to  a  Greek ;  he  undertook  a  cor- 
rection of  the  MSS.  of  the  Bible  by 
means  of  a  collation  of  them ;  and  he  is 
the  founder  of  a  learned  and  scientific 
study  of  the  Bible  among  Christians,  al- 
though his  arbitrary  hermeneutical  prin- 
ciples do  not  allow  all  the  fruits,  which 
otherwise  might  have  been  produced,  to 
arise  from  it. 

As  now  the  number  of  those  who  sought 
religious  instruction  at  his  hands  vvas  con- 
stantly increasing,  and  at  the  same  time 
his  labours  in  biblical  literature  which 
became  continually  more  extensive,  laid 
more  and  more  heavy  demands  upon  him, 
in  order  to  obtain  more  time,  he  shared 
his  office  of  catechist  with  his  friend  He- 
raclas ;  he  transferred  to  him  the  duty  of 
giving  the  preparatory  instruction  in  reli- 
gion, and  reserved  for  himself  the  more 
accurate  instruction  of  those  who  were 
further  advanced,*  apparently  with  respect 
to  both  the  classes  of  catechumens  men- 
tioned above.     (See  above.f) 

The  division  of  the  duties  of  his  office 
in  this  manner  enabled  him  to  enlarge  the 
sphere  of  his  exertions  in  public  teaching 
with  advantage  to  the  Church.  Persuaded 
of  the  utility  of  a  thorough  education  in 
general  knowledge  for  the  right  under- 
standing of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  right 
application  of  their  contents,  and  per- 
suaded also  that  this  enlarged  education 
would  be  the  best  and  most  efficacious 
antidote,  as  well  to  a  too  sensuous  belief, 
as  to  the  too  capricious  and  fantastic 
theosophy  of  the  Gnostics,  he  endea- 
voured   to    spread    such    an    education 


*  Euseb.  vi.  15. 

■\  [I  apprehend  Neander  here  alludes  to  a  note  a 
few  passages  back.  The  two  classes  of  catechu- 
mens are  adult  heathen  converts,  and  Christian 
children._H.  J.  R.] 


ORIGEN BIBLICAL    INTERPRETATION'. 


437 


among  the  young  men  who  joined  them-  learned  labours,  and  Origcn  used  to  c:ill 
selves  to  him.  He  delivered  lectures  as  i  him  his  task-master.  Not  onlv  did  he, 
well  on  that  which  the  Greeks  called  En-  by  his  inquiries  and  demands,  drive  him 
cyclopaedic  education,  as  on  phUosophy.  i  to  many  investigations,  but  he  made  use 
He  explained  to  his  scholars  all  the  old  of  his  own  largo  fortune,  in  order  to  buy 
philosophers,  in  whom  there  were  moral  ;  for  his  friend  the  meaus  of  pursuing  manv 
and  religious  principles ;  and  he  endea-  of  them  that  were  expensive ;  as,  for  in'- 
voured  to  form  them  to  that  freedom  of  |  sUince,  in  those  where  the  purchase  and 


mind,  which  should  enable  them  every 
where  to  separate  truth  from  the  admix- 
ture of  falsehood,  and  to  preserve  them 
also  from  becoming  the  slaves  of  a  school 
or  a  system.*  And  in  all  that  he  did  his 
ultimate  aim  was  to  point  out  to  his 
scholars  how  they  ought  to  use  every 
thing  to  the  service  of  Christianity,  and 


comparison  of  manuscripts  was  neces- 
sary. He  gave  him  seven  rapid  writers, 
who  were  to  take  turns  with  each  other 
in  writing  down  from  his  dictation,  and 
making  a  clear  cop)-  of  all  that  was  writ- 
ten. Origen,  in  a  letter,  says  of  this 
friend,*  "  He  who  gave  me  credit  for  great 
diligence  and  thirst  after  the  Divine  word. 


consider  every  thing  with  reference  to  that  I  has,  by  his  own  diligence  and  love  of  holy 
which  is  Divine ;  and  he  endeavoured  to   learning,  convinced  himself  of  the  con- 


instil  into  them  the  mind  to  do  this.  By 
these  means  he  did  great  service  towards 
promoting  a  more  free  and  enlightened 
Christian  education,  as  tiie  school  which 
originated  from  him  will  prove.  He  suc- 
ceeded also  in  leading  many,  whom  the 
love  of  learning  alone  had  first  broujjlu 


trary.T  He  has  so  completely  surpassed 
me,  that  I  am  in  danger  of  being  unable 
to  meet  his  demands.  The  comparison 
of  manuscripts  leaves  me  no  time  to  eat, 
and  after  my  meals  I  cannot  go  out,  nor 
rest  myself,  but  even  at  that  lime  I  am 
compelled  to  institute  philological  i:iqui- 


to  him,  more  and  more  to  faith  in  the   ries,  and  correct  manuscripts.     Even  the 


Gospel,  by  first  raising  up  in  them  a  long- 
ing after  divine  things,  then  proving  to  i 
them  the  incompetence  of  the  Greek  sys- 
tems of  philosophy  to  satisfy  the  religious 
wants  of  man,  and  by  presenting  to  them  1 
last  of  all  the  doctrines  of  Scripture ! 
about  divine  matters,  and  comparing; 
these  with  the  doctrines  of  the  old  philo-  j 
sophers.  The  completion  of  his  instruc- i 
tion  was  thus  his  lectures  on  the  expla- j 
nation  of  Scripture,  with  which    in    his , 


night  is  not  allowed  me  for  sleep,  but  my 
philological  inquiries  occupy  a  consider- 
able portion  of  it.  1  will  not  mention 
the  time  from  early  in  the  morning  till 
the  nintli,  and  sometimes  even  the  tenth 
hour,J  because  all  who  have  pleasure  in 
such  employments  use  this  time  for  the 
study  of  the  Divine  word  and  reading." 
Ambrose  urged  Origen,  by  making 
known  his  theological  lal)ours,  to  extend 
their  utility   to  the   whole  Church,  and 


case,  the  whole  range  of  theology,  and  l  thus  to  counteract  the  Gnostics,  who  had 
all  Christian  philosophy,  all,  in  short,  at  first  excited  deeper  inquiries  after 
which  he  understood  under  the  name  of  Divine  things  among  the  Christians,  and 
Gnosis,  was  connected;  by  which  means!  then  were  enabled,  under  the  pretext  of 
we  must  allow,  although  he  awakened  in  a  more  profound  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
his  scholars,  reverence  and  love  to  that !  ture,  to  introduce  their  pliilosophy  into 
which   is  Divine  in  Scripture,  and   pre-  j  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  means    of  arbi- 


served  them  from  a  mere  dead  knowledge 
of  Scripture,  he  introduced  much  foreign 
matter  into  Scripture,  and  in  part  led  his 
hearers  away  from  its  proper,  simple,  and 
at    the    same    time    profound,    meaning 


trary  and  allegorizing  explanations.  Ori- 
gen himself  attributes  this  latter  ol^ject 
to  his  labours  in  the  end  of  tlio  fifth 
tomus  of  his  Commentary  on  tlie  Gospel 
of  St.  John,  which    was  in  part  directed 


...ther  than  conducted  them  to  it.  Many  i  against  the  Gnostic  Ileracleon.  "As 
of  those  whom  Origen  was  able  to  lead  j  now,"  he  says,"  the  heterodox  under  the 
thus  gradually  to  the  knowledge  and  the  '  pretence  of  Gnosis,  rise  up  against  the 
love  of  Scripture,  afterwards  became  zea-    holy  Church,  and  propagate  works  con- 


lous  and  successful  teachers  in  the  Church. 

Aml)rose,  the  above  named  friend  of 

Origen,    took    peculiar    interest    in    his 

•  His  scholar,  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  has 
painted  to  us,  in  this  point  of  view,  the  method 
of  instruction  pursued  by  Origen  in  an  oration  of 
his  to  be  quoted  hereafter. 


sisting  of  many  books,  which   promise 
explanations  of  the  evangelic  and  apos- 

•  T.  i.  Opp.  Ed.  de  la  R.  f.  .1. 

■\  [This  is  not  quite  an  exact  traniiliition  of  the 
originnl,  which  ratiu-r  moans.  '  has  put  me  to 
shame,  )A»)^«.  co»rpuit  nie.' — H.  J.  K.] 

i  'I'ill  three  or  four  o'clock  in  the  afternoon, 
acording  to  our  reckoning. 


438 


JEALOUSY    OF    DEMETRIUS. 


tolic  writings,  they  will,  if  we  are  silent, 
arfd  set  fortli  no  true  and  sound  doctrines, 
get  dominion  over  the  hungry  souls,  who, 
for  want  of  wholesome  food,  run  to  that 
which  is  forbidden." 

He  finished  at  Alexandria  his  Com- 
mentaries on  Genesis,  the  Psalms,  the 
Lamentations  of  Jeremiah  (of  which  writ- 
ings only  fragments  have  been  preserved,) 
his  five  first  Tomi  [i.  e.  sections,]  on  the 
Gospel  of  St.  John,  his  Treatise  on  the 
Resurrection,  his  Stromata,  and  his  work 
wE^i  a.^yu'''!  ^'  ^-  pi'ohably  not  about  the 
fundamental  principles  of  the  Christian 
laith,  but  about  the  oi'igin  of  all  Being,* 
a  subject  of  which  the  controversies  with 
the  Gnostics  particularly  treated.  The 
last-mentioned  work  became  of  especial 
importance  by  the  struggles  between  op- 
posite theological  dispositions  which  it 
set  on  foot,  and  by  the  influence  which  it 
exerted  over  the  fate  of  Origen  and  of 
his  school.  At  that  time,  even  more  than 
at  a  later  season,  Platonic  philosophy  and 
the  doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith  were 
in  Iiim  intermingled  together;  his  caprice 
of  speculation  was  afterwards  more  mode- 
rated by  the  influence  of  the  Christian 
spirit,  and  many  notions  which  he 
(although  more  in  a  problematic  than  a 
decisive  manner,)  had  thrown  out,  he 
afterwards  retracted,  although  the  prin- 
ciples of  his  system  remained  always  the 
same.  He  himself  afterwards  declared,  in 
a  letter  to  Fabianus,  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
to  whom  his  system  had  probably  been 
denounced  as  heretical,  that  in  this  book 
he  had  brought  forward  much,  which  he 
now  no  longer  considered  true,  and  that 
his  friend  Ambrose  had  made  the  book 
known  against  his  will.f 

And  yet,  as  it  often  happens,  the  dis- 
pute between  Origen  and  the  party  of 
the  Church  zealots  would  not  have  come 
to  an  open  rupture  so  soon,  without  an 
external  occasion,  and  without  the  acces- 
sion of  personal  and  improper  passions, 
especially  as  Origen  was  far  from  having 
the  pride^  which  commonly  so  easily  at- 
taches itself  to  a  theological  turn  of  mind 
like  his,  and  as  he  always  shows  so  much 
tenderness  towards  those  whose  religious 
and  theological  views  and  condition  are 
different  from  his  own.  The  authority 
of  his  Bishop  Demetrius  was  a  great  sup- 


I  port  to  him  ;  but  this  man,  who  was  ani- 
j  mated  by  the  hierarchical  pride,  which  we 
'  find  subsisting  at  this  age,  especially 
among  the  Bishops  of  the  great  Metropo- 
litan sees,  was  excited  to  jealousy  against 
him,  by  the  great  reputation  of  Origen, 
and  the  honour  which  he  obtained  on 
particular  occasions. 

One  especial  cause  of  this  jealousy  was 
the  honour  showed  to  Origen  by  his  two 
friends,  Alexander,  the  Bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem, the  friend  of  his  youth,  and  Theoc- 
tistus,  the  Bishop  of  Caesarea,  in  Pales- 
tine. It  had  already  much  embittered  the 
proud  Demetrius  against  them,  that  they 
had  permitted  Origen,  as  a  layman,  to 
preach  in  their  Churches.  (See  Part  1.*) 
As,  however,  in  obedience  to  the  call  of 
his  bishop,  he  returned  to  Alexandria,  he 
was  enabled  to  renew  his  former  friendly 
relations  with  him.  But  in  the  year  228 
it  happened  that  he  travelled  into  Hellas,t 
on  account  of  some  ecclesiastical  matters, 
of  which  we  have  no  exact  statement. 
On  this  journey  he  visited  his  friends  in 
Palestine, — and  they  ordained  him  a  pres- 
byter at  Caisarea,  in  the  year  228. 

Demetrius  could  not  forgive  the  two 
bishops  and  Origen  for  this  transaction. 
After  the  return  of  Origen,  he  assembled 
a  synod,  consisting  of  the  presbyters  of 
hisdiocess,  and  of  other  Egyptian  bishops, 
in  which  he  used  against  Origen  that  ex- 
travagant act  of  his  youth,  by  which  he 
was,  undoubtedly,  according  to  the  letter 
of  the  laws  of  the  Church,  excluded 
from  the  clerical  profession.^     But  they 


*  h'.yo;  Si^^iKX,  in  the  language  of  Clement, 
means  a  discourse  which  relates,  to  th«  doctrine 
of  the  r^;^«/.   8ee  Strom.  1.  iv.  .510,  a.  [Pott.  Sylb.] 

-[■  Siee  Hieronym.  ep.  41.  t.  iv.  opp.  ed. 
Martianay. 


*  There  were  apparently,  in  the  year  216,  hos- 
tile incursions  upon  Alexandria  (according  to 
Euseb.  vi.  19,)  which  made  then  an  abode  there 
no  longer  safe  for  him — perliaps,  when  the  fanci- 
ful Caracalla,  departing  for  the  Parthian  war, 
gave  up  this  town  to  plunder  and  to  slaughter  at 
the  mercy  of  his  soldiers  (.^1.  Spartian.  vi.  6  ;) 
and  one  is  inclined  to  think,  that  the  rage  of  the 
heathen  soldiers  would  peculiarly  attack  the  Chris- 
tians. Origen  then  betook  himself  to  Palestine, 
to  visit  his  old  friends;  and,  as  he  himself  says 
(Joh.  t.  vi.  24,)  to  investigate  the  spots  which  hail 
been  trodden  by  Jesus,  by  his  apostles,  and  by  the 
prophets.      Qvi  ic-Togtity  tchv  *;^i'«v  'Itia-M    h-jli  Tmv 

fAH^HTOiV  a/JT'jV    Hit    Tm    ^(>(3<^J)TaiC.) 

f  Perhaps  he  was  called  into  these  parts  in 
order  to  dispute  witli  the  Gnostics  who  were 
spread  about  there,  because  it  was  known  how 
much  he  was  an  adept  in  this  business.  His  dis- 
putation with  Candidus,  the  Valentinian,  the  Acts 
of  which  Jerome  quotes,  might  lead  us  to  this 
conclusion. 

t  It  is  in  Che  highest  degree  probable  that  the 
ecclesiastical  regulation  which  we  find  in  xvii.  of 
the  Canoncs  Apostolici,  was  then  in  existence.  It 
was  there,  however,  by  no  means  unconditionally 
forbidden,  in  accordance  with  the  law  of  the  Old 


TWO    SYNODS    AGAINST   ORIGEX. 


439 


ought  to  have  considered,  that  he  had 
become  a  diflereut  man  since  that  time, 
and  that  he  had  loin^  condemned  lite  shj), 
to  which  his  yoiilhlul  enthusiasm  had  led 
him.  And  yet  he  was  for  this  deposed 
from  the  dignity  of  presbyter,  whicli  liad 
been  conferred  upon  him,  and  the  admi- 


nicated  Origen,  as  a  heretic,  and  the  svnod 
sent  forth  a  violent  decree  against  him. 
It  is  in  reference  to  this,  that  wlicn  he 
began  again  at  Cicsarea  to  continue  liis 
commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
Origen  says,  that  ''God,  who  once  led  his 
people  out  of  Kgypt,  had  saved  him  also 


nislralion  of  the  otlice  of  public  teacliing   out  of   Egypt;  but  that   his  enemy  had 

assailed  him  with  the  utmost   bitterness 


in  the  Alexandrian  Church  was  forbidden 
to  him.*  After  he  had  once  so  strongly 
attracted  to  himself  the  jealousy  and 
haired  of  the  pharisaical  bishop,  he 
could  no  longer  find  any  peace  in  Alex- 
andria. Demetrius  did  not  content  him- 
self  with   this  single    attack,   upon   him 


by  his  recent  letter,  so  utterly  o])posed  U 
the  Gospel,  and  tliat  he  had  raised  up  all 
the  pestilential  winds  of  evil  in  Egypt 
against  him.* 

I      •  We  are  without  connected  and  trustworthy 


but  he   began   to  cast  the  imputation  of    "'='^''""!^  ""^ ,^^^^  important  transactions.     We 
V  ^  .1         1      .  •  r    r^  -  .     '  can  only  endeavour,  bv  mrans  of  comlniiinjr  uar- 


resy  on    the    doctrmes  of  Ongen ;  to   jj,,,,,,,^  ,„  ,^^^^  ,h,  ,;^,  p^^^,^^.^^  ,,f  ^^^^  ^;J^^ 


he 

which    imputation,  perhaps,  the  expres- 
sions of  tlie  latter  in  his  disputes  with  the 


From  the  indications  which  Eusebius  gives,  and 
from  the  alwve-quotcd  words  of  Origen  about  the 


Gnostics  had  given  some  new  occasion.!  i  ^^^  '"^'  ^^  ^'*  youth,  it  is  certain,  that  this  was 
Yet  that  which  animated  him,  gave  him  \  ^l^*^"  ""'^'^  "gainst  him  ;  but  it  could  have  been 
♦;,,:^i.  i.;„  I  ^^^'^  ^  ^  ground  only  tor  excluding  him  from  the 
clerical  otnce.  The  other  proceedings  against 
him  must  have  arisen  from  another  accusation 
against  him.  Photius,  who  had  read  the  Apology 
of  Pamphilus  for  Origen,  says.  Cod.  118.  that  De- 


.•. '&    .  . 

tranquillity  of  mind  enough  to  rinisli  his  I 
fifth  tonius  on  tlie  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
amidst  the  storms  of  Alexandria,  (for,  as 
he  says,;!;  Jesus  commanded  the  storms 

and  waves  of  the  sea,)  until  at  last  metrius  made  it  a  matter  of  reproach  to  him,  that 
he  thought  it  advisable  to  leave  Alex- 
andria, and  to  betake  himself  to  his 
friends  at  Csesarea,  in  Palestine.  But 
Demetrius  pursued  him  even  thither  with 
his  persecutions ;  and  he  laid  hold  of  a 
matter  as  a  pretext,  wherein  he  could 
easilv  fiiul  associate: 


he  had  travelled  to  Athens  without  his  j)crmission, 
and  during  this  journey,  undertaken  without  his 
pennission,  had  allowed  himself  to  be  ordained, 
which  would  certainly  on  the  part  of  Origen,  as 
well  as  of  the  bishop  who  ordained  him,  have 
been  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  the  Church.  But 
supposing  that  Demetrius  did  make  this  accusation 


both  in  FtfVDt  and  '  "o^'"*'^  Origen.  we  have  still  to  inquire,  whether 
^    .       .  ,  .,."/'.      ,    he  had  the  right  to  do  so.     We  see  from  the  quo- 

out  ot    It,  smce  the   prevailmg  doctrmai 


righi  10  uo  so.  we  see  irom  me  quo- 
I  tation  of  Jerome  de  Vir.  illustr.  c.  G2,  that  Alex- 
spirit  in  many  parts  of  the  Church  was  i  ander,  the  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  reply  to  Ueme- 
altogether  hostile  to  the  idealistic  ten-  trius,  might  allege,  that  he  had  ordained  Origen 
dency  of  the  school  of  Origen,  and  since  '  on  the  strength  of  an  epistola  formata,  brought  by 
tlie  book  ,r£Pi  upyu,,  was  calculated  to  ^''"^  f^o"»  ^^i^  own  bishop.  The  laws  of  the 
^        ^^  ^     p  j  Church  about  these  circumstances  were  then,  per- 


give  occasion  to  so  many  accusation.- 


haps,  so  indefinite,  that  Alexander  might  l)elieve 


lieresy.     In  a  more  numerous  synod  of  j  ^^.^^^^^i-  f^^ny  ju^tiV,ed  i„  ordaining  a  man,  who 
Egyptian   bishops,  Demetrius   excommu-  |  was  recommended  to  a  foreign  Church,  and  yet 

that  Demetrius  might  see  in  this  an  inv;ision  of 
the  rights  of  his  episcopal  office.  Bo  Uiis  as  it 
may,  even  this  could  not  be  a  sufficient  ground  for 
excommunicating  Origen.  The  sympathy,  which 
the  attack  upon  him  found  in  other  Churches — 
the  accusations  of  heresy  against  Origen  which 
continued  after  his  death — what  he  said  afterwards 
in  his  own  justification  to  Fabianus,  the  bishop  of 
Koine,  in  the  letter  we  have  already  cited,  (as  he 
had  also  written  to  other  bishops  in  defence  of 
his  orthodoxy.  See  Eusebius,  vi.  36.)  all  thin 
points  out,  that  his  opinions  [seine  Dogmatik,] 
were  the  cause  of  his  excommunication.  We 
see  also  from  what  Jerome  (I.  ii.  adv.  Uufin.  f. 
411,)  quotes  out  of  the  letter  of  Origen  against 
Demetrius,  that  errors  in  the  doctrines  of  the 
faith  had  In-eu  charged  against  him,  as  he  defends 
himself  against  the  accusation  that  he  had  main- 
tained, that  even    Satan  would    hereafter   1m-    in 


Testament,  Deut.  xxii.,  that  any  eunuch  should 
enter  into  the  clerical  profession,  but  it  was  ex- 
])ressly  appointed  that  one,  whom  such  a  misfor- 
tune might  have  Iwfallen  without  his  own  instru- 
mentality, might  be  allowed,  if  he  was  in  other 
respects  worthy,  to  become  a  clergyman ;  it  was 
only  0  iturcv  i-jcja-Dt^iao-stf  /u»  j/vKr&a  KKi^fut:(.  It 
was  only  to  put  a  stop  to  such  ascetic  enthusiasm. 
*  Photius,  however,  says  that  this  synod  had 
already  forbidden  Origen,  not  only  to  exercise  the 
office  of  a  teacher,  but  even  to  remain  at  Alexan- 
dria. And  yet  it  is  difficult  to  see,  how  a  bishop 
at  that  time  could  ell'ect  the  latter  of  these  two 
things.  He  could  only  exclude  him  fiom  the 
communion  of  the  Church,  and  it  was  not  until 
the  srfond  synod  that  this  was  done.  Nor  does 
the  language  of  Origen  appear  to  hint,  that  he 
was  compelled  to  leave  Alexandria. 


•j-  As  we  may  conclude  from  the  disputation    bliss;  although  one  cannot  well  percei\ 


^  h.; 


with  Candidus  the  Valentinian 
Rufin.  f.  414,  vol.  iv. 
t  T.  vi,  Joh.  §  1. 


Hieronym.  adv.  could  deny  this  conclusion,  which  is  groundrd  by 
j  a  necessary  consequence  on  his  system.  Kul'inus 
<  quotes  passagea  out  of  a  defence  of  Origcn's,  ad- 


440 


TWO   SYNODS    AGAINST   ORIGEN. 


This  personal  contest  became  now  a 
contest  between  the  opposite  opinions  of 
two  parties.  The  Churches  in  Palestine, 
in  Arabia,  Phoenicia  and  Achaia  declared 
themselves  for  Origen,  while  the  Roman 
Church  declared  herself  against  him.* 
The  judgment  which  Origen  himself 
formed  of  those  who  branded  him  with 
the  name  of  heretic,  will  be  seen  from 
his  expression  in  the  following  passage,! 
where  after  quoting  1  Cor.  i.  25,  he  says, 
''  Had  I  said,  '  the  foolishness  of  God,' 
how  Avould  those  who  love  to  accuse 
men  of  heresy,^  have  accused  me !  how 
should  I,  who  had  said  a  thousand  things, 
which  they  themselves  approve  of,  have 
been  assailed  for  having  said  this  one 
thing,  '  the  foolishness  of  God  P  "  In 
his  defence  against  the  synod,  which  had 
excommunicated  him,  he  quotes  the  de- 
nunciations of  the  prophets  against  wicked 
priests  and  rulers,  and  then  says,  "  We 
must  pity  them  rather  than  hate  them, 
pray  for  them  rather  than  curse  them,  for 
we  are  created  for  blessing,  and  not  for 
cursing."§ 


dressed  to  his  friends  at  Alexandria,  from  which 
we  see  that  a  falsified  report  [protokoll]  of  a  dis- 
putation held  between  him  and  the  heretics,  had 
excited  astonishment  in  Palestine,  even  among  his 
friends,  at  the  opinions  he  expressed.  They  had 
sent  a  messenger  to  him  at  Athens,  and  begged 
him  to  send  them  the  genuine  original  report. 
Even  at  Kome  these  adulterated  copies  had  been 
propagated.  See  Rufin.  de  Adulteratione  Librorum 
Origenis,  in  opp.  Hieronym.  t.  v.  ed.  Martianay, 
f.  251.  Even  if  Rufinus  is  not  really  a  faithful 
translator,  this  cannot  have  been  wholly  invented 
by  him.  The  disputes  with  the  Gnostics  would 
easily  give  an  opportunity  of  bringing  forward 
the  peculiar  religious  opinions  of  Origen,  and  to 
those  who  had  in  him  so  powerful  an  antagonist, 
an  opportunity  of  rendering  his  orthodoxy  suspi- 
cious in  his  own  Church,  would  be  welcome 
enough. 

*  Hieronym,  ep.  29,  ad  Paulam.  Damnatus  a 
Demetrio  episcopo,  exceptis  Palestine,  et  Arabia;, 
et  Phceniciffi,  atque  Achaia;  sacerdotibus.  He 
certainly  adds,  non  propter  dogmatum  novitatem: 
non  propter  hreresin,  scd  quia  gloriam  eloquentia; 
ejus  et  scientiffi  ferre  non  poterant.  But  this  is 
not  a  fact,  it  is  only  a  subjective  interpretation  of 
motives,  according  to  the  bias  which  Jerome  was 
under  at  that  time.  Compare  also  the  remark 
made  on  the  case  of  Tertullian. 

f  Hom.  viii.  in  Jerem.  §  8. 

i:     (A    <flK!UTHI. 

§  See  I.  c.  Hieronym.  iv.  f.  411.  Compare 
what  Origen  nays  against  the  importance  [i.  c. 
validity,  the  German  is  Bcdeutung. — H.  J.  R.] 
of  unjust  excommunication.  See  above,  page 
136.  Comp.  also  on  .\Tatt.  f.  445,  where  Ori- 
gen, applying  the  passage  in  Matt.  xxi.  16,  to 
the  bisliops  of  his  own  time,  says :  "  As  these 
priests  and  scribes  are  blamable  according  to  the 


The  enemies  of  Origen  were  destined 
to  contribute  to  the  farther  extension  of 
the  sphere  of  his  exertions ;  his  change 
of  residence  to  Palestine  was  assuredly 
followed  by  important  consequences;  be- 
cause an  opportunity  was  thus  afforded 
to  him,  of  effecting  also  from  that  point 
the  propagation  of  a  liberal  and  enlight- 
ened spn-it  in  the  Church ;  and  the  traces 
of  his  exertions  are  to  be  found  for  a  long 
time  in  these  regions.  Here  also  he  col- 
lected a  body  of  young  men  around  him, 
who  educated  themselves  for  theologians 
and  teachers  of  the  Church  under  his 
influence ;  among  whom  was  Gregory, 
who  afterwards  became  so  remarkably 
active  in  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel. 
(Of  him  we  shall  afterwards  speak  more 
particularly.)  He  continued  here  also  his 
literary  labours.  Among  other  works  he 
composed  here  his  already  mentioned 
treatise  on  the  use  of  prayer  and  on  the 
explanation  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  which 
he  addressed  to  his  friend  Ambrose.  He 
was  here  in  a  personal  communication 
with  the  most  distinguished  teachers  of 
Cappadocia,  Palestine,  and  Arabia,  and 
was  constantly  called  upon  to  give  his 
advice  in  deliberations  on  any  novel  cir- 
cumstances in  the  Church. 

As,  under  the  persecution  of  Maximinus 


letter  of  this  history,  so  according  to  spiritual 
application,  are  also  many  high  priests  worthy  of 
blame,  who  adorn  not  the  name  of  the  episcopal 
rank  by  their  lives,  and  have  not  clothed  them- 
selves with  light  and  truth.  (Exod.  xxviii.)  These, 
while  they  behold  the  wonders  of  God,  despise 
the  little  ones  and  babes  in  the  Church,  who  praise 
God  and  his  Christ,  and  they  are  angry  at  their 
advances  in  godliness,  and  they  accuse  them  to 
Jesus,  as  doing  wrong,  while  they  really  do  no 
wrong;  and  they  say  to  him,  Hearcst  thou  what 
these  say  1  And  we  shall  understand  this  the 
better,  if  we  consider,  how  it  often  happens  that 
men  of  an  ardent  spirit,  who  brave  imprisonment 
by  their  bold  confession  of  faith  before  the 
heathen,  who  despise  danger,  and  resolutely  lead 
a  strict  life  of  abstinence  and  celibacy ;  how  it 
happens  that  such  men,  being  rude  in  speech* 
{Ihuroit  T>)  K^ii,)  are  calumniated  by  the  blame- 
worthy high  priests  as  disorderly,  and  how  they 
are  accused  by  them  before  Jesus,  as  if  iheir  own 
conduct  was  better  than  that  of  these  zealous  and 
simple  children!  But  Jesus  gives  his  testimony  to 
the  children,  and,  on  the  contrary,  accuses  the 
high  priests  of  ignorance,  when  he  says,  Have  ye 
not  read  this,  'out  of  the  mouth  of  babes  and 
sucklings  thou  hast  prepared  praise  ]"'yj  Well 
might  Origen  here  set  before  his  mind  the  image 
of  Demetrius,  and  other  bishops  like  him,  who 
were  inclined  'to  judge  the  errors  of  a  pious  en- 
thusiasm with  extreme  severity. 


*    [In  Uteris  vero  ignari.     Lul.  Translator — U. 
J.  R.] 


ACTIVITY   OF   ORIGEN   IN    PALESTINE. 


441 


Thrax,  the  friends  of  Oriofen,  the  Pres- 
byter Prototectus  of  Caesaroa  himself,  and 
Ambrose,  had  much  to  suffer;  he  ad- 
dressed to  these  men,  wlio  were  as  con- 
fessors, in  prison  awaiting  tlie  termination 
of  their  suilerings,  his  treatise  on  JMarhjr- 
dom,  in  which  he  exiiorts  them  to  stead- 
fastness in  their  confession,  and  endea- 
vours to  liold  them  up  by  the  promises 
of  Scripture,  and  to  refute  the  sophistry 
of  which  many  Gnostics,  as  well  as  hea- 
thens, who  considered  religion  as  an 
affair  of  state,  made  use  in  order  to  per- 
suade the  Christians  that,  without  any 
prejudice  to  their  belief,  which  no  man 
wished  to  take  from  them,  they  might 
satisfy  the  demands  of  the  laws  of  the 
state,  in  regard  to  the  external  things  of 
religion.  But  in  this  book  the  prevalent 
tone  is  at  times  more  the  spirit  of  that 
philosophically  ascetic,  and  dehumanizing 
morality,  than  the  spirit  of  that  evangeli- 
cal morality,  which  sanctions  all  that  is 
pure  in  human  nature,  and  unites  the 
consciousness  of  God's  quickening  power 
with  the  feeling  of  human  weakness  ;* 
and  we  find  also  in  the  same  work  the 
false  notions  of  the  opus  operatum  of 
martyrdom,  to  which  we  have  before  al- 
luded ;  and  yet  with  all  this  the  force  of 
his  faithful  confidence  and  his  evangelic 
zeal  for  the  faith  is  beautifully  expressed 
in  it.  He  says  to  the  two  confessors  :t 
"  I  desired  also,  that,  during  the  whole  of 
the  present  struggle,  you  should  rejoice 
and  be  glad,  wjien  you  remember  the 
great  recompense,  which  is  laid  up  in 
heaven  for  those  who  suffer  persecution 
and  shame  for  righteousness'  sake,  and 
for  the  sake  of  the  Son  of  ]Man,  as  the 
apostles  of  old  rejoiced,  that  they  wore 
counted  worthy  to  suffer  shame  for  the 
name  of  Christ.  But  if  at  any  time  you 
feel  anxiety  in  your  soul,  let  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  that  dwells  in  you,  speak  to  it 
thus,  when  she  for  her  part  would  trouble 
him,  '  VVMiy  art  thou  cast  down,  O  my 
soul!  and  art  so  disquieted  within  mc  ? 
Trust  in  God,  for  I  will  give  thanks  to 
him,  forasmuch  as  he  helps  me  witii  his 
countenance,' Ps.xlii.  6.  .  .  Let  it  [never] 
be  troubled !  but  even  before  the  tribunal 


*  In  proof  of  this  assertion  we  may  particularly  , 
appeal  to  the  manner,  in  which  Orii^en  explained  • 
so  artificially  the  simple  sense  of  liiose  words  of  | 
Christ,  which  he  spoke  in  his  agony,  and  which  i 
the  spirit  we  allude  to  would  not  allow  him  to  con-  , 
ceive  in  their  natural  meanincj,  §  29.  [|)p.  18!) —  ' 
191.  in  Wetsteiii's  Edition  of  the  Dial.  cont.  Mar-  ! 
cion.  et  alia  opuscuia.  Basilcrc,  IG73. — H.  J.  K.]   , 

+  §  4.  [p.  165.  Ed.  Wetstein.]  | 

56 


itself,  and  while  tlie  naked  sword  imiicnds 
over  the  neck,  let  it  be  guarded  by  the 
peace  of  God,  which  passeih  all  under- 
sumding."*  He  says  to  tliem  in  aiiDiher 
passage,!  ''Since  the  Word  of  God  is 
lively  and  powerful,  and  shar])(T  than  any 
two-edged  sword,  and  penetrates  even  to 
the  dividing  asuiuler  soul  and  spirit,  mar- 
row and  bone,  and  is  a  judge  over  the 
thoughts  and  the  faculties  of  the  heart, 
Ileb.  iv.  12 ;  this  Divine  Word  now 
bestows  on  our  souls  the  peace  which 
passeth  all  understandino,  which  it  once 
shed  over  the  souls  of  apostles,  but  it  has 
thrown  the  sword  between  the  earthly 
and  the  heavenly  form  within  us,  in  order 
that,  for  the  present,  it  may  take  our 
heavenly  man  to  itself;  and  hereafter, 
when  we  are  so  far  advanced,  as  to  need 
no  farther  dividing,^  it  may  make  us  al- 
together heavenly.  And  he  is  come,  also, 
to  brinsr  not  only  a  sword  on  earth,  but 
the  fire  also,  of  which  he  -'^ays,  '•  I  would 
that  it  were  already  kindled,"  Luke  xii. 
49.  Let  then  this  lire  be  kindled  also  in 
you,  and  let  it  consume  all  your  earthly 
thoughts,  and  be  ye  baptized  with  tfie 
baptism,  whereof  Jesus  spoke.^  And 
thou  also!  (.Ambrose)  who  hast  both 
wife  and  children,  and  bretlu-en  and  sis- 
ters, remember  the  words  of  the  Lord  : 
'  if  any  man  cometh  to  me,  and  hateih 
not  father,  mother,  wife,  children,  breth- 
ren, sisters,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple.' 
But  both  of  you  remember  also  the 
words,  '  If  any  man  cometh  to  me  antl 
hateth  ilot  also  his  own  life,  he  caimot  be 
my  disciple.'" 

It  was,  perhaps,  this  very  persecution, 
which  moved  Origen  to  leave  for  a  time 
the  place,  which  hitherto  had  been  his 
abode.  Since  the  persecution,  as  we  have 
before  remarked,  was  only  local,  it  was 
easy  to  obviate  it  by  a  flight  to  regions 
where  trancjuillitv  at  that  moment  pre- 
vailed. Origen  betook  himself  to  Ca'sarea 
in  Cappadocia,  to  his  frientl,  the  iii.-hop 
Firmilianus,  with  whom  he  was  in  the 
habit  of  communicaling  on  subjects  of 
theological  learn ing.|| 

But,  probably,  exactly  al)()Ut  the  time 
that  he  had  settle<l  there,  the  above-men- 
titmed  persecution  (see  above)  in  Cappa- 
docia broke  out,  and  he  was  induced  by 


•  ^  37.  [p.  201.  Ed.  WeUtcin.] 

j-  He  a[iplies  this  passage  to  the  Logos. 

t   No  separation  of  iiolinexs  from  ungodUness. 

^   Luke  xii.  ."JO. 

II  'J'hey  used  somctimen  to  visit  each  other,  in 
order  to  converse  on  theological  sutijccU.  Euscb. 
vi.  27. 


JUHTJS    AFRICANUS. 


442 


it,  to  withdraw  into  the  house  of  Juliana, 
a  Christian  lady,  who  for  two  years  kept 
him  hidden  in  her  house,  and  maintained 
him.  He  there  made  a  discovery  of  great 
importance  to  his  literary  undertakings. 
For  some  years  he  had  already  busied 
himself  with  a  work,  the  object  of  which 
was,  as  well  to  correct  the  text  of  the 
Alexandrian  version  of  the  Old  Testament 
(which  was  then  the  translation  prevalent 
in  the  Church,  and  was  looked  upon  by 
many  Christians,  in  consequence  of  the 
old  Jewish  legend,  as  inspired,  and  the 
MSS.  of  which  diflered  very  much  from 
each  other  in  their  readings,)  as  also  to 
promote  the  improvement  of  the  transla- 
tion itself,  by  comparing  it  with  other  old 
translations,  and  with  the  Hebrew  original. 
Origen,  who  constantly  disputed  much 
on  religious  subjects  with  heathens  and 
Jews,  had  learnt,  as  he  himself  says,  how 
necessary  a  knowledge  of  the  original 
text  of  the  Old  Testament  was,  in  order 
not  to  give  openings  to  the  Jews,  for  they 
were  in  the  habit  of  ridiculing  the  igno- 
rance of  the  heathen  converts,  who  dis- 
puted with  them,  when  they  quoted  such 
passages  from  the  Alexandrian  version,  as 
did  not  exist  in  the  Hebrew,  or  when 
they  knew  nothing  of  those,  which  were 
only  to  be  found  in  the  Hebrew.*  He 
had  therefore  made  use  of  the  fortune  of 
his  friend  Ambrose,  and  of  his  own  fre- 
quent journeys,  in  order  to  collect  differ- 
ent manuscripts  of  the  Alexandrian  ver- 
sion and  other  old  translations,  wherever 
he  could  find  them.  He  had  for  instance, 
in  rummaging  every  where,  found  at  Jeri- 
cho in  a  barrel,  an  old  translation  of  some 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  was 
elsewhere  unknown.  Now  it  happened 
that  his  protectress  Juliana  had  inherited 
the  writings  of  the  Ebionite  Symmachus, 
who  possibly  lived  about  tlie  beginning 
of  that  century,  and  he  found  in  her 
house  a  commentary  by  this  writer  on 
the  ii»yyiXto»  x«o'  ^ESfXiovi.J  and  a  trans- 


lation made  by  him  also  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament.* He  was  now  enabled  to  com- 
plete his  great  work  of  a  collection  of  tlie 
then  existing  translations  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  a  comparison  of  them 
witli  the  Hebrew  text.f 

After  the  murder  of  the  Emperor  Maxi- 
minus,  Origen  was  able  under  Gordianus, 
A.  D.  238,  to  return  again  to  Ciesarea,  and 
there  again  to  begin  his  former  course  of 
activity. 

As  he  had  once  before,  on  account  of 


*  Origen.  Ep.  ad  African.  §  .3.  rcuvm;  oh^m  i/xmy 

o-'.vTtv,  oi.'(J"  ij  sSic  A'JTCK,  ■y'ckiU'^V'TU.i  rcu:  i^a-o  toiv 
iSvm  TriorTij-.VTUc,  1;  t'  HKiifix  HSU  Tatg'  adiTu;  avxyt- 
y^'JLUfj.ax  a.yvij'MiTi.c. 

\  'J'hc  following  words  of  Eusebius,  vi.  17,  on 
the  work  of  Symmaclius  (whicli  he  aflerwaids 
reckons  among  his  s^^>iva«c  si?  t:<;  ^ga<})!tc)  "  sv  d<; 
i.\iii  TTg^oi;  TO  HUrx  Muri-xicv   uTroTttvcjUivo;  ij-j.y^iKtov 

from  the  context  can  hardly  he  taken  to  moan,  as 
A'alcsius  makes  them,  that  Symmachus  endea- 
voured to  maintain  the  El)ionitish  doctrines  (i<rain.st 
the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew;  but  they  must  be  un- 
derstood to  mean,  that  he  wrote  a  commentary  on 


the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew  (that  is  to 
say,  probably,  on  the  t-j^yyixt'.v  x-^b'  'F./i^^tcv;  which 
resembled  St.  Matthew's)  from  which  he  endea- 
voured to  establish  the  Ebionitish  doctrines. 

*  Palladius  (in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury) relates  in  his  history  of  Monachism  (h*u- 
cr/axi,)  ch.  147,  that  he  had  found  in  an  old 
manuscript  which  had  descended  from  Origen, 
the  words  written  by  Origen  himself,  in  which  he 
narrated  the  circumstance  mentioned  in  the  text. 
This  Palladius,  however,  in  consequence  of  his 
credulousness,  is  a  very  suspicious  witness,  but  in 
the  present  case  we  have  no  grounds  to  suspect 
his  evidence,  especially  since  it  harmonizes  well 
with  the  account  given  in  Eusebius,  vi.  17. 

-)-  The  Hexapla.  It  would  be  foreign  to  our 
purpose  to  enlarge  on  this  and  similar  works  of 
Origen,  for  information  on  which  we  must  refer 
to  the  Introductions  to  the  Old  Testament.  M'e 
only  quote  here  the  words  of  Origen  himself  on 
the  comparison  instituted  by  him  between  the 
Alexandrian  version  and  the  other  old  translations 
of  the  Old  Testament.  After  he  has  spoken 
(Comment,  in  Matth.  f.  381.  Ed.  Huet.)  of  the 
differences  between  the  copies  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, which  had  arisen,  partly  from  the  negli- 
gence of  transcribers,  and  partly  from  their  bold- 
ness in  assuming  a  critical  liberty  of  correcting 
the  text,  he  adds  the  following  words:  "  As  far  as 
relates  to  the  difference  between  the  copies  of  the 
Old  Testament,  we  have  found  by  God's  assist- 
ance a  mode  of  remedying  this  inconvenience,  by 
using  the  other  translations  as  a  criterion.  Wher- 
ever any  thing  was  doubtful  in  the  version  of  the 
LXX.  by  reason  of  a  difference  in  the  manuscripts, 
wc  have  constantly  retained  that  which  agreed 
with  the  rest  of  the  translations,  and  we  have 
marked  a  great  deal,  which  was  not  found  in  the 
Hebrew,  with  an  obelus  (the  critical  mark  to  de- 
note an  omission)  because  we  did  not  venture  to 
leave  it  out  entirely.  We  have  added  also  some 
passages  with  the  mark  of  an  asterisk,  to  denote, 
that  we  have  added  these  passages,  which  are  not 
found  in  the  LXX.,  from  the  other  translations,  in 
accordance  with  the  Hebrew,  and  that  he  who  is 
inclined  to  do  so,  may  receive  tlieni  into  the  text 
(I  think  we  must  read  7r^o7iriii*)  but  he,  who  is 
offended  at  them,  may  receive  them  or  not,  just  as 
he  pleases."  [Comp.  Ep.  ad  African,  p.  226,  Ed. 
Wetstein. — H.  J.  R.]  From  these  latter  words 
we  see  how  much  Origen  had  to  fear  those,  who 
were  ready  to  charge  every  one,  who  deviated 
from  that  which  had  been  received,  with  falsifica- 
tion of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

*  [The  common  reading  is  Tr^onrttt. — IL  J.  R.] 


IMPROVEMENT   OF   THE    SEPTUAGINT. 


some  ecrlesiastical  afliiirs,  been  sent  for 
from  Alexandria  by  the  Churches  of 
Greece,  which  esteemed  him  most  highly, 
the  same  thingapparenlly  took  place  ajrain. 
His  way  led  him  ihrouuh  Nicomedia  in 
Biihyiiia,  where  he  staved  some  days  with 
his  old  friend,  Ambrose  ;  who,  if  the  ac- 
count of  Jerome  is  correct,  had  in  the  mean 
time  become  a  deacon,  although  it  does 
not  appear  whether  Ambrose  had  em- 
ployment in  the  Church  of  thiit  city,  or 
had  only  come  thither  in  order  to  meet 
Origen.  He  there  received  a  letter  from 
one  of  his  friends'  Julius  Africanus,*  one 
among  the  distinguished  Cliristian  men  of 
learning  of  this  period.  It  appears  that 
Origen,   at   a   conversation    which    took 


•  He  was  a  man  far  advanced  in  years,  as  will 
appear  immediately  from  his  beinsj  able  to  address 
Driven,  at  that  time  a  person  of  lifty  years  of  age, 
by  the  title  of'  my  son.'  He  seems  to  have  fixed 
his  usual  residence  in  the  old  decayed  town  of 
Emmaus,  or  JN'icopoli,  in  Palestine  (as  it  was  after- 
wards called  by  the  Romans,  in  order  to  distin- 
guish it  from  the  Emmaus  of  the  iS'cw  Testament, 
it  being  more  distant  from  Jerusalem  than  the 
latter;  namely,  about  176  stadia.)  The  inhabi- 
tants of  this  decayed  place  chose  him  as  their  de- 
legate to  the  Emperor  Heliogabalus,  to  etlect  the 
restoration  of  their  town  by  this  emperor,  which 
he  obtained  for  them.  Hieronym.  de  Vir.  Illustr. 
c.  63.  He  is  known  as  the  first  Christian  compiler 
of  a  history  of  the  world  (his  ;^/p.v:^g«?/*  in  five 
books,  see  Eusebius,  vi.  31.)  'I'his  work  which 
is  only  known  to  us  by  the  quotations  of  other 
writers,  and  fragments,  proceeded  from  an  inten- 
tion to  compose  something  of  an  apologetic  nature. 
He  is  known  also  to  us,  by  his  letter  to  Aristides 
on  the  solution  of  the  difference  between  the  ge- 
nealogies of  Jesus  as  given  by  8t.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke,  of  which  a  portion  is  preserved  by  Eu- 
sebius, Hist.  i.  7.  Another  remarkable  fragment 
of  this  letter  has  been  published  by  Kouth,  Keli- 
quise  Sacra;,  vol.  ii.  p.  115.  In  that  he  combats 
those,  who  maintained  that  these  ditferent  genea- 
logies were  given,  \n  order  to  show  clearly  in  this 
wav  the  truth,  that  Jesus  is  both  a  King  and  a 
High  priest,  as  being  descended  from  a  royal  and  a 
priestly  race.  He  here  also  declares  himself  ex- 
pressly against  the  theory  of  a  fraus  pia.  "  May 
such  an  opinion  never  prevail  in  the  Church  of 
Christ  that  a  falsehood  has  been  invented  for  the 
glory  of  Christ!"  /xx  Sx  K^tr'.oi  tu'.ut<,(  x-)j:,  tv 
tKx.Kiia-1%  Xg/TTcy,  OT/  -{^h:  ruyxUTXl  fie  niv-.v  kj.i 
i'.'fiK'-yni  .Kf.s-Tit/.  Eusebius  ascribes  a  work  to 
htm,  which,  under  the  name  of  xtrT-.u,  contains  a 
kind  of  literary  miscellany,  according  to  the  then 
mode  of  unscientifically  mingling  together  a  variety 
of  historical  materials.  .\iid  yet  among  the  frag- 
ments of  this  work,  which  are  ascribed  to  him, 
there  is  much  which  does  not  suit  the  views  and 
principles,  which  we  are  accustomed  to  ascribe  to 
this  man,  from  what  we  learn  of  him  elsewhere. 
The  most  natural  supposition  is,  that  he  wrote 
that  work  before  his  habiu  of  thought  had  become 
decidedly  Christian. 


443 

place  in  the  presence  of  .Africanus,  had 
cited  the  history  of  Susannah  on  the 
authority  of  the  Sepluagiiit  version,  as  a 
genuine  piece  belougintj  to  Daniel.  -\l'ri- 
camis  expressed  to  him  iiis  .surprise  at 
this  in  a  letter,  distinguished  alike  by  the 
moderate,  delicate,  and  learned  tone  of  i\a 
argument,  and  by  its  unprejudiced  criti- 
cism, ami  he  begged  hiui  to  enter  into  a 
f;irthcr  discussion  of  the  sul)ject.  Oris^en 
,  answered  him  from  Nicomedia,  in  a  very 
elaborate  writing.  Not  so  unprejudiced 
as  .Africauus,  he  endeavoured  to  delVnd 
the  autliority  of  the  Alexandrian  version 
and  collection  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It 
is  remarkable  to  observe  how  the  free, 
inquiring  spirit  of  Origen,  from  a  mistaken 
pietv,  and  perhaps  also  from  being  made 
I  fearful  in  consequence  of  the  troubles 
;  which  he  had  involuntarily  caused  in  the 
Church,  fell  back  upon  the  authority  of 
a  Church  traditioti,  which  was  supposed 
I  to  be  under  tiie  guidance  of  God  ;  he 
says,*  •■'  But  hath  not  that  Providence, 
I  which  has  given  edification  in  the  Holy 
Scripture  to  all  the  Churches  of  Christ, 
taken  care  also  for  those  who  have  been 
!  bought  with  a  price,  for  whom  Christ 
I  died,  whom  [i.  e.  Christ]  though  he  was 
I  his  own  Son,  God,  being  love  itself, 
spared  not;  but  gave  him  up  for  us  all, 
that  with  him  he  might  give  us  all  things.! 


;      •   C.  4.  [p.  227.  Ed.  Wet-stein.] 

'  -(■  These  are  arguments  by  which  a  free  inves- 
tigation of  the  canon  of  Scripture, — an  iti()uiry,  I 
freely  grant,  which  ought,  like  all  theological  in- 
quiries, to  be  animated  by  a  spirit  of  piety, — has 
often  been  opposed.  But  the  argunionts  of  Origen 
only  prove  that  God,  who  revealed  in  ('hrist  his 
unspeakable  love  to  man,  without  doubt  must 
have  provided  for  all  the  wants  implanted  by  him- 
self in  human  nature.  Bui  tin-  mode,  in  which 
he  has  provided  for  them,  must  not  be  determined 
n  priori  in  accordance  with  the  prejudices  of  any 
existing  system  of  opinions  (einer  stehenden  dog- 
matik.)  nor  according  to  the  measure  of  the  limited 
faculties,  the  little  faith,  or  the  duliiess  of  man. 
Nay,  after  all,  a  mode  by  which  truth  comes  forth 
victorious  from  the  contest  with  error,  after  a  free 
inquiry,  m.iy  be  the  mode  most  consonant  to  hu- 
man nature  itself.  It  may  l)e  the  plan  of  Provi- 
dence, that  Faith  should  fight  the  battle  out  her- 
self witiiout  any  external  su]iport,  by  means  of  iu 
own  inward  and  Divine  power,  by  means  of  iU 
own  attractive  power  over  the  inmost  heart  of 
man.  Tlu-  incorrect  conclusion,  drawn  from  these 
correct  premises,  would,  if  consist»'ntly  cjirri«^  out, 
lead  to  the  supposition  of  an  outward  visible 
Theocracy  constantly  guiding  mankind,  a.s  in  a 
state  of  infancy,  as  alas !   in  after  times  the  con- 

I  elusion  was  pushed  to  this  point.  But  it  is  far 
rather  true  that  human  nature,  in  conseijuencc  of 

I  having  had  every  thing  given  to  it  in  Christ,  has 


OTHER   WRITINGS    OF   ORIGEN. 


444 


Consider,  therefore,  whether  it  is  not 
good  to  remember  these  words,  '  Remove 
not  the  boundaries  which  thy  fathers 
have  made.'  "*  (Prov.  xxii.  28.)  He  says 
then,  "  that  although  he  has  not  neglected 
the  other  old  translations,  he  has  yet  be- 
stowed his  chief  industry  upon  the  Alex- 
andrian version,  in  order  that  it  might  not 
seem  as  if  he  wished  to  introduce  a 
spurious  innovation  into  the  Church,  and 
in  order  that  he  might  give  no  handle  to 
those  who  sought  for  opportunities,  and 
who  desired  to  calumniate  those  men, 
who  were  well  known,  and  had  obtained 
stations  of  eminence  in  the  Church."'t 
Athens  was  the  point  to  which  the 
journey  of  Origen  tended  ;  he  stayed  there 
some  time,  finished  his  commentary  on 
Ezekiel,  and  began  that  on  the  Song  of 
Solomon.;}: 

Till  the  end  of  his  life  he  busied  him- 
self in  theological  labours ;  and  during 
the  reign  of  Philip  the  Arabian,  with 
whose  family  he  was  connected,  he  wrote 
the  work  against  Celsus,  which  we  have 
already  mentioned,  his  Commentary  on 
St.  Matthew,  &c.  He  now  permitted  for 
the  first  time,  being  sixty  years  of  age, 
his  sermons  to  be  taken  down  by  short 
hand  writers,  hi  what  reverence  he  was 
held  we  may  see  clearly  from  the  fact, 
that  he  was  called  into  council  by  synods 
of  bishops  in  weighty  ecclesiastical  afiairs, 
on  which  people  could  not  come  to  a 
decision  ;  and  we  have  already  spoken  of 
the  manner  in  which  Beryllus,  the  Bishop 
of  Bostra,  in  Arabia,  received  instruction 
at  his  hand.  We  must,  however,  still 
mention,  that  among  the  Christians  of 
Arabia  at  that  time  a  party  had  caused  a 
controversy,  by  maintaining  that  the  souls 
died  with  the  body,  and  that  they  would 


grown  up  to  the  maturity  of  the  years  of  man- 
hood. 

*  These  words,  which,  taken  as  an  uncondi- 
tional and  unlimited  rule  of  life,  have  so  often 
since  those  times  been  used  in  support  of  old  errors 
to  the  prejudice  of  pure  evangelical  truths,  contain 
the  same  principle,  which  the  religio  a,  majoribus 
tradita  of  the  heathen  at  first  opposed  to  the  new 
Gospel.  See  the  First  Part  of  this  work.  The 
truth  victorious  through  her  Divine  jwwer — the 
answer,  that  could  not  be  refused,  to  inquiries 
based  on  the  iiitnost  being  of  human  nature, — the 
satisfaction  of  undeniable  wants,  required  by 
human  nature  itself, — this  needed  no  prejudice 
for  its  support,  no  prejudicium,  no  prajscriptio  an- 
tiquitatis. 

■]■  ivu  fjih  Tt  ^ag«^«g«TTaii  t(,)i:>iiifji(v  t-m;  vtto  rev 
cl/pavov  \x.KKno-tai;  k.*1  Trpo^ttrm  hS'ieuw  tc/c  ^unva-iv 

d<*Cg^aC,  ibiACU^t  TCWC  iv  jUiJ-Oli  171/X.O'^UV'TiiV  K.%t  Tm  ii'Xr 

+  Euseb.  vi.  32.' 


be  raised  again  only  at  the  general  resur- 
rection at  the  same  time  with  the  bodies. 
It  was  an  old  Jewish  notion  (see  above,) 
that  immortality  was  not  founded  upon 
the  nature  of  the  soul,  but  a  peculiar  gift 
of  Divine  grace ;  a  representation  which 
had  been  transferred  from  Judaism  to 
Christianity,  traces  of  which  we  find  in 
the  theory  of  the  Gnostics  about  the  na- 
ture of  the  Psychici,  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  Clementine,  and  in  the  opinions  of 
Justin  and  Tatian.  Perhaps  also  in  this 
district,  the  position  of  which  placed  it 
in  close  connexion  with  Jews,  it  was  no 
new  doctrine,  but  the  predominant  one 
from  ancient  times ;  and  perhaps  the  in- 
fluence of  Origen  (in  whose  system  the 
doctrine  of  the  natural  immortality  of  the 
soul  necessarily  obtained  a  place,)  first 
effected  the  change  that  this  latter  should 
obtain  universal  acceptance  among  the 
Church-teachers  of  that  district ;  and  that 
the  small  party,  which  still  maintained 
the  old  opinion,  should  appear  heretical^ 
although  the  predominant  opinion  had 
previously  really  pronounced  itself  against 
it*  [the  new  opinion.]  Hence  we  may 
understand,  how  the  convocation  of  a 
Great  Synod  was  considered  necessary, 
in  order  to  allay  these  controversies. 
When  they  were  unable  to  agree,  Origen 
was  invited  by  the  Synod,  and  his  influ- 
ence prevailed  upon  the  opposers  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  natural  immortality  of  the 
soul  to  acknowledge  their  error,  and  re- 
nounce it. 

Origen,  who  on  account  of  his  indi- 
vidual opinions  was  considered  as  an 
heretical  opposer  of  the  evangelical  doc- 
trines of  the  Christian  faith,  was  destined 
in  the  last  days  of  a  life,  consecrated  to 
labouring  and  struggling  for  that  which 
he  believed  to  be  the  cause  of  Christ,  to 
confute  by  facts  the  accusations  of  his 
enemies,  and  to  show  how  he  w-as  ready 
to  sacrifice  every  thing  to  his  faith,  and 
how  he  belonged  to  those  who  are  ready 
to  hate  even  their  own  lives  for  the  sake 
of  the  Lord. 

As  the  fury  of  the  enemies  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  Decian  persecution  fell 
chiefly  upon  those  perso7is,  who  were  dis- 
tinguished among  the  Christians  by  their 
oflices,  their  virtues,  or  their  knowledge, 

*  Eusebius  (vi.  37,)  may  perhaps  judge  the 
controversies  of  this  period  too  much  according 
to  his  own  subjective  doctrinal  system,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  Church-orthodoxy  of  his  own 
times,  when  he  represents  the  maintainers  of  this 
opinion  as  generally  acknowledged  teachers  of 
heresy,  and  propagators  of  a  new  opinion. 


DEATH    OP   ORIGEN.  445 

and  their  activity  in  tlie  propagation  of  j  the  Onjrenislic  school.  Tlie  contePt  be- 
the  faith,*  so  it  was  natural  that  a  man  tween  tliese  opposing  principles  is  the 
like  Oiigcn,  should  be  especially  a  murk  source  of  the  most  marking  phenon)ena 
for  fanatical  cruelty.  After  a  steadfast  A)r  the  theological  development  of  the  lat- 
igeon,  ter  portion  of  tliis  period.  We  shall  iicre 
to  the    first  throw  a  glance   upon    tlie  Cliurch. 


confession  he  was  thrown  into  a  dungeon 

and  it  was  endeavoin-ed,  accordin 

plan  pursued  in  tlie  Decian  persecution,'  which  was  the  original' scene  of  the 

to  triumph  over  the  weakness  of  age  by  j  tivity    of   Origen,    namely,   the    Jilcxan- 

refined  and  gradually  increasing  tortures,  i  drian  and  tlie  R^i/plian  Cliunli. 

n 
I) 


But  the  faith,  which  he  bore  in  liis  heart, 
supported  the  feebleness  of  his  a<re,  and 


Origen  had  left  behind  him  disciples 
this  district  who  continued  to  work  on 


enabled  him  to  bear  all  the  trials  to  which  his  spirit,  although  with  a  greater  degree 
they  put  him.  After  he  had  endured  so  j  of  speculative  moderation,  Tiie  bishop 
much,t  he  wrote  from  his  prison  a  letter'  Demetrius,  as  is  shown  by  what  precedes, 
full  of  comfort  and  encouragement  for ,  was  rather  a  personal  enemy  to  Origen 
others.  The  circumstances  already  re-  i  than  an  enemy  to  his  theological  opinions, 
lated,  (see  above,)  which  in  part  softened  The  opposition  made  by  him  to  these 
this  persecution,  and  in  part  entirely  put  was,  apparently,  in  his  case,  only  a  pre- 
an  end  to  it,  obtained  at  last  for  Origen  i  text,  lie,  therefore,  allowed  the  disciples 
also  freedom  and  tranquillity.  And  yet  of  Origen  to  continue  their  operations  un- 
perhaps,    disturbed,  and  he  h 


the  sufferings  undergone  by  him 

contributed  to  hasten  his  death.     He  died  I  the  break 

about  the  year  254,  aged  sixty-nine.;j: 

The  influence  of  Origen  on  the  forma- 
tion of  a  theological  system  did  not  con- 
tinue bound  up  in  his  own  person,  but 
remained  and  developed  itself  indepen- 
dently of  him,  by  means  of  his  writings 
and  his  disciples,  but  not  without  a  con- 
tinuing contest  with  the  opposite  dispo- 
sitions of  tlie  human  mind.  The  friends 
of  Chiliasm,  of  the  carnal  and  literal  in- 
terpretation of  Scripture,  and  the  anthro- 
pomorpliical  and  anthropopathical  mode 
of  representing  Divine  things  connected 
with  such  a  system  of  interpretation,  and 
the  zealots  for  the  letter  of  the  doctrinal 
tradition  of  the  Church,  were  enemies  of 


♦  The  personsB  insignes. 

j-  Euseb.  vi.  39. 

i  Euseb.  vii.  2.  According  to  Photius,  cod. 
118,  there  were  two  accounts  of  the  death  of 
Origen,  which  difTered  both  as  to  its  circumstances, 
and  the  time  of  its  occurrence.     Pamphilius  and  |  manner  all   writinsrs  of  the    lieretfcs,  and 


imself  died  soon  alter 
out  of  these  controversies 
in  the  same  year,  231. 

Heraclas,  the  friend  and  scholar  of 
Origen  already  mentioned,  who  after  his 
[Origen's]  departure  had  become  the  head 
of  the  Catechetical  school,  was  made 
successor  to  Demetrius  in  the  Episcopal 
office.  In  the  year  247,  Heraclas  was 
succeeded  in  his  office  of  Catechist,  and 
afterwards  as  bishop,  by  Dionysius,  an- 
other worthy  disciple  of  Origen,  who 
constantly  retained  his  love  and  reverence 
for  his  master,  to  whom  when  in  prison, 
(see  above,)  during  the  Decian  persecu- 
tion, he  wrote  a  letter  of  consolation. 
This  man,  as  he  himself  says,  had  come 
to  a  belief  in  the  Gospel  through  the 
method  of  free  invesligalion^  by  giving 
an  unprejudiced  and  tliorough  exami- 
nation to  all  systems ;  and  hence  he  re- 
mained true  to  this  principle,  even  as 
a  Christian  and  a  Church-teacher.  He 
read  and    examined  in    an    unprejudiced 


rejected  their  systems  only  after  having 
learned    to    know  them    accurately,  and 


many  others,  who  had  been  personally  acquainted  I 

with  Origen,  related  that  he  died  at  Csesarea  as  a  I 

martyr  in  the  Decian  persecution.     Others  related 

that  he  lived  to'  the  times  of  Gallus  and  Volu-   a't^^'"  having  placed  hiinsell  in  a  condition 

.sianus,  and  then  died  at  Tyre,  and  was  buried  I  to    confute    them    on    just    grounds.      A 

there;  and   the   truth  of  this  latter  account  was  ^  presbyter    of    his    Church    warned    him 


testified  by  the  letters  written  by  Origen  after  the 
persecution,  of  the  genuineness  of  which,  how- 
ever, Photius  was  not  decidedly  convinced.  But 
after  that,  which  Eusebius,  who  certainly  followed 
the  account  of  his  friend  and  instructer  Pamphi-  j 
lius,  says  in  the  above  cited  jiassagc  of  his  Church 
History,  it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  Pamphi-  [ 
lius  really  gave  the  account  alluded  to  by  Photius.  1 
Perhaps  Photius  may  have  misunderstood  Pam- ' 

philius,  when  by  the  term  Martyrdom  he  meant  ,  ,  i  •     i 

only   a   confession   under  torture,   or  when   he  j  X^"  arc  al)le   to    judge,  and    to  examine 


against  the  evil,  which  might  happen  to 
his  soul  from  his  employing  himself  so 
repeatedly  with  these  godless  writings. 
But  the  Spirit  of  God  gave  liim  con- 
fidence enough  not  to  allow  himself  to 
be  frightened  at  tliis  danger.  He  believed 
that  he  heard  a  voire  which  said  to  him. 
Read  all   that  falls  into  your  hands,  for 


ipoke  of  the  consequences  of  those  sufferings  as 
all'ecting  Origen. 


every  thing,  and  this  has  brcn  to  you  from 

the  very  beginning   a   source  of  faith." 

2F 


446 


HIERACAS    AND    DIONYSIUS. 


Dionj^siiis  was  strengthened  by  this  en- 
couragement in  his  resolution,  and  he 
thouorht  it  corresponded  with  that  precept 
of  the  Lord  to  those  who  are  strong, 
which  is  found  in  an  Apocryphal  Gospel, 
'"Be  ye  able  money-ciiangers :"  (yma^B 
coKiuoi  T^acTT-'^iTai,)  that  is  to  say,  be  ca- 
pable of  distinguishing  genuine  from 
counterfeit  coins.* 

We  have  already  on  different  occasions 


Afterwards  also,  in  the  last  period  of 
the  third  century,  Pierius  and  Theognos- 
tus  distinguished  themselves  as  teachers 
of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  hi  the  frag- 
ments of  their  works,  (preserved  in  Pho- 
tius,)  we  recognise  the  peculiar  doc- 
trines of  Origen. 

We  have  already  remarked,  that  in 
Egypt  itself  an  opposition  existed  between 
an    Origenistic    and    an    anti-Origemstlc 


iven  examples  of  the  liberal  mind  and  |  party.     We  find  this    opposition    in  the 


moderation  of  this  man,  and  of  the  blessed 
effects  produced  by  it.  His  Christian 
moderation  and  mildness  are  shown  also 
in  his  letter  to  an  Egyptian  bishop,  named 
Basilides,  which  contains  answers  to  in- 
quiries concerning  circumstances  relative 
to  the  discipline,  and  the  rites  of  the 
Church.|  The  letter  of  Dionysius  to 
this  bishop,  who  was  subordinate  to  him, 
concludes  thus :  "  Thou  hast  not  laid 
these  inquiries  before  me,  as  if  thou  wert 
ignorant  in  the  matter,  but  in  order  to  do 
me  honour,  and  that  I  might  be  of  the 
same  mind  with  you,  as  indeed  I  am.  I 
have  stated  and  explained  my  opinion  to 
you  not  as  a  teacher,  but  in  all  the  open- 
ness with  which  we  must  speak  to  each 
other.  But  it  is  now  your  business  to  judge 
about  the  matter ;  and  write  to  me  then 
what  seems  to  you  better,  or  whether  you 
are  yourself  satisfied  that  this  is  right."t 


*  Dionysius,  in  his  letter  to  the  Romish  Bishop 
Philemon,  (Euseb.  vii.  7,)  appeals  to  a  heavenly 
vision  and  to  a  heavenly  voice.  He  speaks  of  the 
thing  so  simply,  and  betrays  so  little  design,  that 
we  should  do  him  an  injustice  to  charge  him  with 
what  is  called  a  fraus  pia,  although  the  some- 
what lax  principles  of  the  Alexandrian  school  in 
this  respect  (a  laxity  which  is  connected  with 
their  distinction  between  two  different  conditions 
with  regard  to  religion)  might  favour  such  an 
accusation ;  but  we  must  here  take  into  the 
account  also,  that  these  pious  men  certainly  were 
better  guided  by  the  Christian  spirit  which  ani- 
mated them,  than  by  their  theoretical  principles. 
It  may  easily  be  explained  in  a  psychological 
way,  by  supposing  that  the  truth,  which  the  Spirit 
of  God  caused  him  to  acknowledge,  presented 
itself  again  to  his  imagination  in  this  form, 
perhaps  in  a  dream.  The  manner  in  which  he 
speaks  of  it  seems,  however,  to  indicate  that 
he  himself  was  not  so  firmly  convinced  of  the 
Divine  nature  of  the  vision,  as  of  the  truth  of  its 
purport,  and  of  the  declaration  of  Christ,  his 
words  being  these:  o.7r-Ji^-j./u>iv  to  c'^^^a,  ic  utrotr- 
TsACH  <pa>vyi  ^uvr^iT(_cv,  t»  Ktycuj-yi,  «Stc. 

f  Which  letter  maintains,  in  the  Greek  Church, 
a  lawful  reverence  as  an  in-i<rro>,>i  k*6'Mk>u  The 
fragments  which  remain  of  it  were  last  published 
by  Kouth,  Reliquirc  Sacrre,  vol.  ii. 

i  A  larger  fragment  of  the  work  of  this  Diony- 
sius "  On  Nature,"  in  which  he  defends  faith  in 
Providence    against  the   Atomic  theory  of   the 


fourth  century,  especially  among  the 
Egyptian  monks,  occurring  again,  and  the 
I  parties  named  Anthropomorphites  and 
Orlgenists.  Perhaps  also  this  opposition 
among  the  Egyptian  monks  is  to  be  de- 
rived from  the  time  of  which  we  have 
just  been  speaking.  There  were,  indeed, 
at  this  time  no  monks ;  but  as  early  as 
the  end  of  the  third  century  there  were 
in  Egypt  assemblies  of  ascetics,  who 
lived  in  the  country.*  Among  these 
Egyptian  ascetics  there  appeared  a  man 
at  the  end  of  this  period,  by  name  Hie- 
racas,  who  was  reckoned  among  the  he- 
retics in  the  times  that  followed,  because 
men  jndged  of  him  from  the  position  as- 
sumed by  the  Church  system  of  doctrine, 
as  this  had  forined  itself  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, but  who,  during  his  lifetime,  would 
hardly  have  been  considered  as  a  he- 
retic.f  As  far  as  we  can  become  ac- 
quainted with  his  turn  of  mind,  and  his 
doctrines,  from  the  fragmentary  accounts 
preserved  of  him,  for  which  we  are  ciiiefly 
indebted  to  Epiphanius,'^  he  had  in  his 
peculiar  views  much  that  was  akin  to  the 
Origenistic  school,  and  it  may  be  the  case 
that  he  himself  was  originally  of  that 
school ;  but  we  nevertheless  find  no  such 
similarity  of  doctrines,  that  it  cannot  be 
explained  any  other  way.  Views  similar 
to  these  might  easily  be  formed  also  in 
other  parts  of  Egypt. 

Hieracas  lived  in  the  town  of  Leonto- 
polis§  in  Egypt,  as  an  ascetic  ;  and,  ac- 
cording to  the  practice  of  ascetics,  he 
procured  for  himself  what  was  necessary 
for  his  livelihood,  and  means  for  the  ex- 


F.picureans,  is  preserved  to  us  by  Eusebius  in  the 
xivth  Book  of  his  Prceparatio  Evangelica,  and  it 
is  printed  in  Routh,  1.  c.  vol.  iv. 

*  As  we  may  perceive  from  ths  Life  of  Antony 
in  Athanasius.  More  will  be  said  on  this  subject 
in  the  following  period. 

•j-  On  this  account — as  in  this  work  we  can  con- 
ceive the  notion  of  heresy  only  in  its  historical 
signification,  we  have  not  reckoned  Hieracas 
among  the  heretics,  as  is  usually  done. 

i  Ha;res.  67. 

§  Unless,  perhaps,  he  was  at  the  head  of  an 
ascetic  body  in  the  neighbourhood  of  that  town. 


HIERACAS.* 


447 


ercise  of  his  benevolence,  by  an  art  wliich 
was  much  prized,  and  much  used  in 
Egypt,  that  of  fine  pcnmcmship,  in  wiiich 
he  was  skilful,  both  as  regarded  tlie 
Greek  and  the  Coptic  character.  He  must 
have  lived  to  beyond  the  age  of  ninety 
years,  which  may  easily  be  explained 
from  his  simple  mode  of  life,  and  to  his 
very  end  was  in  possession  of  his  facul- 
ties, and,  therefore,  was  able  to  exercise 
liis  art  to  the  latest  hours  of  his  life.  He 
was  equally  acquainted  with  the  Greek 
and  the  Coptic  literature;  and  from  this 


the  last  subject,  he  may  verv  possibly 
have  iield  that  the  soul  would  become 
enveloped  with  a  higher  organ  of  ethereal 
matter  (a  crwy.a.  wfvuxrty.oy.)  And  this 
opinion  also  he  miglil  dress  up  in  such  a 
manner  that  he  could  not  be  .said  exactly 
to  reject  the  doctrine  of  u  resurrection  of 
the  botly,  but  only  to  exjjlain  it  afier  iiis 
own  views. 

As  far  as  regards  the  first  point,  he 
pronounced  that  an  unmarried  life  of  con- 
tinence was  an  essential  element  in  true 
Christian   perfection.     In  the  reconnnen- 


very  cause  it  may  have   happened,  that   dation  of  celibacy  he  placed  the  elm 


lie  mingled  with  Christianity  many  ele- 
ments foreign  to  it,  drawn  from  both  those 
classes  of  literature.  He  wrote  commen- 
taries on  the  Bible  both  in  the  Coptic  and 
the  Greek  language,  and  composed  many 
hymns  for  the  Church 


teristic  difFerence  between  the  monil 
position  of  the  Old  and  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament. Hieracas  discovers  the  traces  of 
those  false  views  of  the  nature  of 
morality,  and  of  the  requirements  of  the 
moral  law  from  human  nature,  (^according 


He  was  addicted  to  the  allegorizing  in-  to  which  it  might  be  supposed  that  this 
terpretation  of  Scripture,  which  was  closely  moral  law  could  be  so  easily  fullllled, 
connected  with  a  certain  theosophical  dis-  and  men  could  do  even  more  than  it  re- 
position.    Like  Origen   he  explained  the  !  quired,  viz.  the  opera    supererogationis.) 

thing, 


account  of  Paradise  in  an  allegorical  man- 
ner, and    denied 

sensuous]  Paradise.     Probably,  like  Ori 
sen,  he  considered  Paradise  as  the  svm- 


when    he    inquire.s.    "'  What    new 
material    [sinnliches, '  then,  has  the  doctrine  of  the  only-begot- 
ten   One    introduced  ?    what    new    good 
hath  he  planted  in  mankind  ?     The  Old 


bol  of  a  higher  world  of  spirits,  from  Testament  has  already  treated  of  the  fear 
which  the  heavenly  Spirit  sunk  down  I  of  God,  of  envy,  of  covetousness,  he. 
through  an  inclination  for  earthly  matter.  |  What  new  thing  then  remains,  if  it  be 
But  as  men  were  by  no  means  of  one }  not  the  introduction  of  celibacy .'"  This 
mind  as  to  what  was  to  be  understood 
symbolically  in  that  narrative,  and  what 


mquu'V,   we   must 
that    Hieracas    had 


acknowledge,    snows 
no  riirht  conception 


literally,  and  also  as  nothing  had    been  j  either  of  the  requirements  of  the  moral 
finally  settled  (see  above)  in  the  prevail- 
ing doctrine  of  the  Church  on  the  origin 
of  souls,    and,  besides,   as   the  peculiar 


opinions  of  Origen  had  at  that  time  in 
the  Egyptian  Church  many  considerable 
advocates,  he  could  not  have  been  gene- 
rally set  down  as  a  heretic  on  that  ac- 
count. 

From  that  theory  of  his  concerning  the 
incorporation  of  the  heavenly  Spirit, 
which  sunk  down  to  a  union  with  mat- 
ter, it  may  easily  be  explained  how 
Hieracas  must  have  despised  the  earthly 
material  body,  and  have  made  its  renun- 
ciation and  mortification*  the  chief  busi- 
ness of  Christian  morality,  and  how  he 
must  have  contended  against  the  doctrine 
that  the  soul  once  freed,  should  again  at 
the  Resurrection  become  enclosed  in  this 
prison-house  of  the  body.     In  regard  to 


[*  Enfausserung.  Perhaps  astronj^er  phrase 
would  more  nearly  translate  Ncaniicr's  word.  It 
seems  to  express  such  a  system  of  sclf-deiiial  as 
would  almost  free  us  from  the  body,  even  while 
we  are  in  it. — H.  J.  R.] 


Law,  or,  which  is  closely  connected  with 
it,  of  that  which  Christ  is  as  the  Re- 
deemer of  mankind,  and  of  the  nature  of 
redemption.  From  the  view  of  human 
nature,  and  of  the  requirements  of  the 
moral  Law  upon  it,  wliich  we  find  here 
set  forth,  a  doctrine  might  easily  be  de- 
duced, according  to  which  man  has  no 
need  of  a  Redeemer.  But  it  would  be 
unjust  on  that  account  to  ascribe  to  Hie- 
racas the  doctrine  that  Christ  was  only 
the  founder  of  a  more  perfect  moral  sys- 
tem, and  not  the  Redeemer  of  mankind. 
A  zealoils  Mf)ntanist  might  have  said 
something  similar  to  wliat  Hietacas  ad- 
vanced. And  traces  of  these  false  ethical 
and  anthropological  views,  are  besides 
found  also  at  this  season,  and  particularly 
among  the  .Mexandrians. 

By  means  of  pas.^ajes,  detached  from 
their  context,  in  the  7lh  chapter  of  the 
first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  he  en- 
deavoured to  prove  that  St.  Paul  had  per- 
mitted marriage  only  out  of  a  reirard  for 
the  weakness  of  men,  and  only  to  avoid 
a  worse  evil  in  the  case  of  those  who 


448  HIERACAS. 

were  weak.  In  the  parable  of  the  virgins, 
Matt.  XXV.,  lie  neglected  the  rule  of  inter- 
pretation, which  indicates  that  we  are  not 
to  seek  a  resemblance  in  every  particular, 
but  only  in  the  points  of  comparison; 
and  he  concluded  from  tliat  parable  that 
here  virgins  only  were  named,  and 
that  only  unmarried  persons  could  attain 
to  a  participation  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  In  his  application  of  the  passage. 
in  which  it  is  said,  that  "  without  holiness 
no  man  can  see  God,"  Heb.  xii.  14,  he  sets 
out  from  his  presumption  that  the  nature 
of  holiness  consists  in  a  life  of  celibacy. 
As  Hieracas  himself  admits  that  St. 
Paul  permitted  marriage  to  those  who  are  , 
we^k,  it  follows,  that  he  by  no  means  un-  [ 
conditionally  condemned  married  Chris-  ■ 
tians  and  excluded  them  from  the  number 
of  Christians.  It  may  be  the  case,  that  per- 
sons drew  too  large  conclusions  from 
many  of  his  exaggerations  in  his  recom- 
mendation of  celibacy.  Or  else,  when  he 
said  that  only  those  who  lived  in  celibacy 
could  attain  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
he  must  by  that  expression  have  under- 
stood not  the  blessedness  of  heaven 
generally,  but  only  the  highest  grade  of 
it;  which  doctrinal  expression,  as  pe- 
culiar to  himself,  appears  likely  to  have 
been  thus  used,  from  what  we  are  now 
about  to  observe. 

In  virtue  of  his  ascetic  disposition 
Hieracas  laid  particular  stress  on  this 
point,  viz.  every  one  Avas  to  obtain  for 
himself  a  participation  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  by  his  own  moral  endeavours, 
and  his  own  ascetic  strictness.  This 
point,  the  laying  particular  stress  on 
man's  own  endeavours,  was  also  alto- 
gether in  accordance  with  the  Alexan- 
drian views.  Now  Hieracas,  setting  out 
from  the  principle  :  "  that  participation 
in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  being  only  the 
recompense  of  a  combat,  he  who  has 
never  fought,  cannot  attain  the  victor's 
crown,"  came  to  this  conclusion,  "chil- 
dren who  die  before  they  attain  to  know- 
ledge and  consciousness,  do  not  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  He  could 
hardly  have  intended  thus  to  express  an 
unconditional  sentence  of  condemnation 
tipon  them,  but  only  to  exclude  them 
from  the  highest  grade  of  blessedness, 
which  proceeds  from  communion  with 
God,  and  from  the  ennoblement  of  human 
nature  by  its  union  with  God  in  Christ : 
for  the  particij)ation  in  this  is  only  to  be 
attained  by  man  through  his  own  moral 
endeavours,  when  he  does  more  than  tlie 
Law   requires.     He   supposed   a  middle 


state  for  these  children,  as  was  afterward 
supposed  in  the  case  of  unbaptized  chil- 
dren by  many  Orientals  and  by  Pelagius. 
U  Hieracas  maintained  this  with  regard 
to  all  children,  even  those  that  were  bap- 
tized, it  follows  from  this  that  he  denied 
a  supernatural  operation^  as  existing  in 
inlant  baptism.  Perhaps  also  in  accord- 
ance with  this  principle  he  opposed 
infant  baptism  itself,  and  pronounced  it 
to  be  a  rite  of  a  later  origin,  which  was 
contrary  to  the  intention  of  baptism  and 
the  nature  of  Christianity.  What  we 
have  here  observed,  serves  also  to  the 
confirmation  of  what  we  have  said  above, 
that  Hieracas  by  no  means  reverenced 
Christ  merely  as  a  moral  teacher ;  it  is 
clear  from  it,  that  he  recognised  him  as 
an  ennobler  of  human  nature,  the  ob- 
tainer  of  the  highest  grade  of  blessedness, 
to  which  men  could  not  have  attained  by 
their  own  powers. 

In  the  view  of  orthodoxy  maintained 
by  the  Church  in  later  days,  errors  would 
be  charged  on  Hieracas  in  regard  to  the 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity.  He  must  have 
used  the  comparison  that  the  Son  of  God 
emanated  from  the  Father,  as  the  light  of 
a  lamp  is  kindled  from  another  lamp,  or 
as  a  torch  is  divided  into  two.*  Such 
sensuous  comparisons  were,  it  must  be 
granted,  contrary  to  the  spiritual  disposi- 
tion of  Origen  ;  but  the  older  Church- 
teachers,  Justin  and  Tatian,  had  been  fond 
of  them.  He  maintained  further,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  xvas  represented  under 
the  image  of  Melchisedec,  for  he  [the 
Spirit,]  is  set  forth  both  as  the  advocate 
for  men,  Rom.  viii.  26,  and  as  a  priest. 
He  represents  the  image  of  the  Son,  sub- 
ordinate indeed  to  him,  but  the  most  like 
to  him  among  all  beings,  which  repre- 
sentation was  entirely  conformable  to  the 
Origenistic  theory  of  subordination,  which 
maintained  itself  for  a  long  time  in  the 
Oriental  Church.f 


Arius  ad  Alexandr.  apud  Epiphan.  Hscres.  69. 
§  7.     Athanas.  t.  i.  p.  ii.  68. 

•j-  He  appeals  to  a  passage  of  an  Apocryphal 
writing,  which  is  of  importance  for  the  illustra- 
tion of  the  doctrinal  history  of  the  earliest  times, 
the  u)a/3*T;xtv  'Ha-^r.u  ;  that  is,  the  narrative  of  the 
ascension  of  Isaiah  into  different  regions  of  the 
heaven,  and  of  what  he  saw  there.  After  the 
accompanying  angel  has  shown  Isaiah  the  Son  of 
God,  who  stands  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  the 
uy-^Tnnc;,  Isaiah  inquires  kcu  Tic  itrrtv  o  axxoc  o 
o/u.crj(  ctwTM  i^  igiuTiedii  sx8a)V ;  nM  iiTi  <rv  ynaiTnat 
tout'  itTTi  TO  ayloy  "mvjfxrt  TO  Kaxcuv  iv  crot  ««/  ty  roK 
7rpo<p>ir!tt(  Kit  «»  <|'»a"/  iy.oicy  to)  oyxTrinu-  'I'he  pas- 
sa'gc  is  found  in  this  work  which  has  now  beea 


GREGORIUS    THAUMATURC.US. 


449 

The  influence  of  Ori^en  extended  itself  witli  ^reat  facility  put  in  exeriition  his 
through  the  influence  of  his  friends  and  plan  of  studying  Roman  law,  hy  going 
scholars  from  Palestine,  as  far  as  Cappa-  from  Cacsarea  lo  the  celebrated  neigh- 
docia  and  Pontus,  as  the  three  great  bonring  school  of  Roman  jurisprudence 
Church-teachers  of  Cappadocia  give  tes-  at  Berytus  in  Phenicia.  Theodorus  ac- 
timony  to  it  even  in  the  fourth  century,  cepted  the  ofl'er;  but  this  journey  was  at- 
We  must  here  mention  particularly  his  tended  by  consequences  difll-rent  from 
great  scholar  Gregori/,  on  whom  the  ve- '  those  which  he  had  expected.  He  be- 
neration  of  Cliristians  has  conferred  the  came  acipiainted  widiOriL'en  at  Ca?sarea ; 
name  of  wonder-worker  {QuvixaTov^yo^.)  Origen  soon  remarked  tlie  powers  of  the 
His  original  name  was  Theodorus.  He  young  man,  and  endeavoured  to  win  them 
was  descended  from  a  respectable  and  to  the  service  of  something  higher  than 
wealthy  family  at  Neo-Ca;sarea  in  Pon-  that  which  then  animated  him.  Theodo- 
tus  ;  his  father,  a  zealous  heathen,  edu-  rus  felt  himself  attracted  by  Origen,  as  he 
cated  him  in  the  principles  of  heathenism,  worked  upon  his  .spirit  and  his  heart,  ex- 
But  when  he  was  fourteen  years  of  age  citing,  warming,  and  encouraging  them, 
he  lost  his  father,  and  now  he  was  first  In  spite  of  his  own  will  he  felt  liimself 
gained  to  the  cause  of  Christianity,  as  it  detained  there ;  he  forgot  Rome  and 
often  happened  (see  above)  that  the  Gos-  Berytus,  and  the  study  of  the  law.  Ori- 
pel  first  found  entrance  into  families  by  gen  led  him  to  perceive  the  nothingness 
means  of  children  and  women.  He,  how-  of  his  former  endeavours  and  pursuits, 
ever,  still  knew  Christianity  only  from  he  lighted  in  the  soul  of  the  young  man 
the  tradition  of  others,  he  still  remained  ;  the  holy  fire  of  love  to  truth  and  to  god- 
unacquainted  with  Holy  Scripture,  his  in-  j  liness  [lit.  the  Divine.]  The  noblest 
terest  in  religion  was  still  a  subordinate  j  effort  of  Origen,  as  Theodorus  himself 
feeling,  and  the  endeavour  after  a  splen- !  represents  it  in  his  farewell  address,  was 
did  career  in  the  world  was  of  more  '  to  excite  in  him  a  spiritual  activity  of  his 
value  in  his  eyes.  His  mother  used  every  own,  and  an  unprejudiced  spirit  of  in- 
means  in  her  power  to  enable  him  to  learn  quiry  and  examination.  After  he  had 
whatever  in  those  days  would  serve  to  i  allowed  him  to  seek  for  the  scattered 
promote  the  object  of  his  wishes  in  this  j  beams  of  Truth  in  the  systems  of  Greek 
respect.  He  therefore  received  a  good  philosophy  he  sliowed  him  the  higher 
rhetorical  education,  so  as  to  be  able  to  j  thing  which  Revelation  bestowed  on  him  ; 
advance  himself,  either  as  a  rhetorician  ;  he  led  him  now  to  the  study  of  Holy 
or  an  advocate;  and  he  also  learned  Latin, '  Scripture  and  explained  it  to  him.  Theo- 
the  language  both  of  the  governing  I  dorus  says  of  Origen's  exposition  of 
power  and  of  the  courts  of  law.  His  in-  Scripture;  ^' I  think  he  spoke  this  in 
structer  in  the  Roman  language  showed  no  other  way  than  by  the  communion  of 
him  how  very  necessary  to  him  a  know-  j  the  Holy  Spirit,  for  to  be  a  prophet  and  to 

the  self- 
same power.  And  none  of  the  prophets 
can  understand  it,  to  whom  the  Spirit 
himself,  from  whom  the  prophecies  come, 


ledge  of  the  Roman  law  would  he  for  the  1  understand  a  prophet  requires 
attainment  of  the  object  he  had  in  view.' 
He  began  this    study,  and    had   already ' 
formed  a  scheme  to  visit  Rome,  in  order ' 


to  increase  his  acquaintance  with  the ,  has  not  given  the  understanding  of  his 
Roman  jurisprudence.  But  Providence '  words.  This  man  has  received  the 
had  selected  him  for  an  instrument  in  a  greatest  gift  of  God,  to  he  the  interpreter 
work  of  higher  importance,  and  as  he  for  Jiicn,  of  the  words  of  God,  tc)  under- 
himself  remarks,  in  his  portraiture  of  the  stand  the  word  of  God,  as  God  speaks 
events  of  his  life,  without  his  own  desire  [  it,  and  so  to  preach  it  lo  men  that  they 
or  will,  he  was  prepared  for  that  w<irk.      |  can  understand  it. 


His  brother-in-law  had  been  called  to 
Cicsarea  as  law-adviser  (assessor,)  to 
Pra:;ses,  of  the  province  of  Palestine.  He 
had  left  his  wife  at  Neo-Ca;sarea,  but  she 
was  now  lo  follow  him.  They  requested 
his  brother-in-law,  the  young  Theodorus, 
to  conduct  her  to  him,  as  he  might  then 


published   in   a  complete    manner   from  the  old 
Ethiopic   translation,    by    R.    Laurence,   Oxfi/rd, 
1819,  pp.  58,  59,  V.  32— 36. 
57 


After  he  had  passed  eipht  years  with 
the  I  Origen,  and  apparently  received  baptism 
also  at  Caj.«arca,  and  assumed  also  here 
the  name  of  Gretrorim,  he  returned  to 
his  own  country.  It  was  with  sorrow 
that  he  loft  his  instructer,  on  whom  his 
whole  soul  hung:  he  compared  the  bond 
which  knitted  him  to  Origen,  with  the 
bond  of  friendship  between  a  David  and 


Panegyric,  in  Grig,  c  15. 
2  p2 


HIERACAS — HIS    CONVERSION. 


430 

a  Jonathan.  He  testified  his  thankfulness 
to  Origen,  and  to  Providence,  which  had 
conducted  him  to  Origen  without  his 
knowledge  or  will,  in  his  farewell  oration, 
in  which  he  describes  the  events  of  his 
life,  and  the  methods  of  instruction  and 
edification  employed  by  Origen.* 

While  he  tears  himself  away  with  pain 
from  intercourse  with  his  dear  instiucter, 
and  from  unmixed  employment  about 
godly  things,  and  with  sorrow  and  fear 
prepares  to  meet  the  occupations  of  so 
different  a  character,  to  which  he  must 
devote  himself  in  his  own  country,  he 
speaks  thus  : — "  But  why  should  1  lament 
this?  We  have,  we  know,  a  Saviour  for 
all,  even  for  those  who  are  half-dead,  and 
fallen  into  the  hands  of  robbers.  One 
who  cares  for  all,  and  is  a  physician  for 
all,  the  watchful  protector  of  all  men. 
We  have  also  the  seed  wilkin  us^  of  which, 
as  bearing  it  about  within  us,  we  become 
conscious  through  thee  (Origen,)  and  the 
seed  which  ive  have  received  from  thee, 
those  glorious  doctrines.  With  this  seed 
we  depart,  in  tears  indeed,  because  we 
are  leaving  thee,  but  taking  this  seed  with 
us.  Perhaps  the  heavenly  Protector  will 
join  himself  to  our  company,  and  save 
us,  but  perhaps  we  shall  return  to  thee, 
and  bring  to  thee  also  from  that  seed 
fruits  and  grain, — not  ripe  ones,  indeed, 
(for  how  can  that  be  ?)  but  such  as  can 
grow  up  amidst  civil  employments."  And 
turning  himself  to  Origen,  he  addresses 
him  tlius :  But  thou,  dear  head !  stand 
up!  and  dismiss  us  with  thy  prayer;  as 
thou  hast  led  usf  to  salvation  by  thy 
holy  doctrines,  while  we  were  with  thee, 
so  lead  us,  now  that  we  are  departing 
from  thee,  to  salvation  by  tliy  prayer. 
And  transfer  us  and  commend  us,  or 
rather  only  give  us  back  again  to  God, 
who  led  us  to  you.     Thank  him  for  that 


*  We  have  followed  this  oration,  as  the  most 
IrusUvorthy  source,  for  the  history  of  the  early  life 
and  education  of  Gregory.  The  accounts  given 
by  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  in  his  life  of  this  Gregory, 
are  in  open  contradiction  to  the  narrative  of  this 
Gregory  himself;  and  as  Gregory  of  Nyssa  dressed 
up  rhetorically  what  he  had  taken  from  imauthcn- 
tic  inaccurate  accounts,  it  would  be  a  useless 
trouble  to  endeavour  to  reconcile  the  contradictory 
narratives  with  each  other.  The  Panegyricus  of 
Cucgory  may  be  found  in  the  fourth  volume  of  the 
works  of  Origen,  by  rfe  la  Rue,  and  in  the  third 
volume  of  the  Biblioihecn  Patruin  of  Galland. 

\  He  speaks  herein  the  plural  number,  because 
he  probably  had  in  his  mind  at  the  same  time  his 
brother  Athenodorus,  who  came  with  him  to 
Origen,  and  also  afterwards  became  Bishop  of  the 
tyhurch  of  Pontus.     See  Euseb.  vi.  30. 


which  he  has  hitherto  done  for  us,  but 
call  upon  him  also,  that  he  may  engraft 
his  commands  upon  our  Spirit,  that  he 
may  pour  upon  us  the  fear  of  God,  and 
that  this  may  serve  as  our  best  corrector. 
For  at  a  distance  we  can  no  longer 
hearken  to  him  with  that  freedom,  with 
which  we  have  done  so.  as  long  as  we 
have  been  with  you.  Pray  to  him  to 
send  us  a  good  angel  to  accompany  us, 
as  a  consolation  for  our  separation  Irom 
you.  But  entreat  him  also  to  conduct  us 
back  to  you,  for  this  alone  will  be  our 
chief  consolation." 

After  his  departure  also  Origen  retained 
him  in  his  heart.  We  have  still  a  letter 
full  of  fatherly  love,  which  he  addressed  to 
him.  (Philocal.c.13.)  He  here  .says  to  him, 
that  his  distinguished  qualities  might 
make  him  an  able  Roman  jurisconsult  or 
a  respected  teacher  of  one  of  the  cele- 
brated philosophical  schools  ;  but  he 
wished  that  Gregory  should  propose  to 
himself  Christianity  alone  as  his  aim  and 
object,  and  use  his  talents  only  as  means 
to  the  one  great  end.  According  to  his 
principles,  which  we  have  before  detailed, 
as  to  the  relation  of  different  departments 
of  knowledge,  and  especially  of  Philoso- 
phy, to  Christianity,  he  incites  him  to 
appropriate  to  himself  from  the  whole 
circle  of  human  knowledge,  \lit.  from  the 
Encyclopeedical  sciences]  and  from  philo- 
sophy, every  thing,  which  he  migiit  be 
able  to  use  for  the  advantage  of  Chris- 
tianity. By  many  beautiful  allegorical 
explanations  of  the  narratives  of  the  Old 
Testament  he  endeavours  to  make  it  clear 
to  him,  that  we  must  use  every  thing  to  the 
service  of  godliness  [lit.  the  Divine,]  and 
sanctify  every  thing  else  by  referring  it  to 
that ;  but  not,  as  often  happens,  forget  god- 
liness itself  amidst  these  elements  which 
are  foreign  to  it,  and  thus  desecrate  it  by 
the  admixture.  He  then  addresses  him 
thus  : — ••'  Do  thou  tlien,  my  son  !  above 
every  thing  study  the  Holy  Scriptures ; 
but  let  it  be  a  serious  study  to  thee,  for 
Scripture  requires  a  very  serious  study,  in 
order  that  we  may  not  too  hastily  pro- 
nounce or  judge  any  thing  out  of  it. 
And  if  with  a  believing  heart,  and  a  mind 
well  pleasing  to  God,  and  j)re-occupied 
with  him,*  thou  studiest  the    Scripture, 


*  The  Greek  »-§ox«4/c  can  hardly  be  rendered 
into  German,  for  the  German,  "vorurtheil"  [pre- 
judice,] according  to  the  usage  of  our  language,  is 
generally  taken  in  a  bad  sense.  We  should  rather 
use  the  word  voraussetzung  [presumption,  or  pre- 
supposition.] Origen  means  that  the  reader  of 
tScriptuie  ought  beforehand  to  be  filled  with  the 


INTERCOURSE    WITH    ORIGEN. 


451 


then  knock,  where  anything  in  it  is  shut 
up  to  you,  and  it  will  be  opened  to  you 
by  tlie  porter,  of  whom  Jesus  speaks, 
John  X.  3,  '  To  him  shall  the  doorkeeper 
open.'  Seek  with  immovable  faith  in 
God,  the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture  which 
is  hidden  from  the  multitude.  But  let  it 
not  be  enough  to  thee  to  knock  and  to 
seek,  for  prayer  is  especially  necessary  for 
the  understanding  of  holv  things,  in  ex- 
citing us  to  wiiich  the  Saviour  has  not 
only  said,  'Knock, and  it  shall  be  opened 
to  you,'  and  'seek,  and  ye  shall  fmd,' 
but  also,  '  pray,  and  it  shall  be  given  to 
you.' " 

He  answered  the  expectations  of  his 
great  teacher.  While  he  found  in  his 
native  city,  of  which  he  became  bishop, 
seventeen  Christians,  the  major  part  of  the 
inhabitants  was  converted  by  him,  and 
Christianity  extended  far  into  Ponius.  It 
is  a  matter  of  regret,  that  we  have  no 
more  accurate  and  authentic  accounts  of 
the  etliciency  of  this  remarkable  man, 
than  the  fabulous  and  rhetorical  life  writ- 
ten by  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  a  century  after- 
wards. Perhaps,  while  he  followed  the 
principles  of  the  Alexandrian  school  in 
regard  to  the  condescension  to  the  weak- 
ness of  the  many,  and  to  the  gradation  in 
religious  education,  he  was  nevertheless 
too  yielding,  in  order  to  convert  the  hea- 
then in  greater  numbers ;  perhaps  he 
thought,  that  if  once  they  only  belonged 
to  the  Christian  Church,  the  spirit  of  the 
Gospel  and  the  increasing  activity  of  their 
teachers  might  gradually  carry  them  far-  | 
ther  on.  As  he  observed  that  many  of  j 
the  people,  out  of  attachment  to  their 
former  festivities,  which  were  interwoven 
Avith  heathenism,  remained  fettered  to  the 
religion  of  their  ancestors,  he  wished  to 
give  the  newly-converted  something  to 
supply  their  place.  After  the  Decian 
persecution,  during  which  many  in  this 
region  had  died  as  martyrs,  he  appointed 
a  general  festival  in  honour  of  the  martyrs, 
and  sufiered  the  rugged  multitude  to  cele- 
brate this  witii  the  same  sort  of  feasts  as 
those  which  were  usual  at  the  heathen 
commemorations  of  the  dead  (Parentalia,) 
and  other  heathen  festivals.  lie  thought 
that  thus  one  obstacle  to  conversion 
would  be  removed,  and  that  if  they  had 
once  become  members  of  the  Christian 
Church,  they  would  by  degrees  volun- 
tarily  renounce    sensuous    indulgences, 

persuasion,  that  the  Holy  Scripture  is  cmbucd 
with  a  Divine  spirit,  and  cannot  lead  him  astray, 
even  when  in  sinu;Ic  passages  it.s  Divine  nature 
does  aot  make  itself  apparent  to  bim. 


after  their  minds  should  have  become 
spiritualized  through  Christianity.*  But 
he  forgot  what  an  intermixture  t)f  heathen 
and  Christian  views  and  riles  might  arise 
from  this  acquiescence  in  heathen  cus- 
toms, as  really  did  happen  afterwards, 
and  how  dilllcult  it  is  for  Ciirisiianily  to 
penetrate  properly  into  the  life,  when  it 
is  debased  from  the  beginning  with  such 
an  admixture.! 

We  have  a  simple  and  clearly  writtea 
paraphrase  of  the  Preacher  of  Solomon^ 
[i.  e.  Ecclesiastes,]  by  Gregory.  A  con- 
fession of  fai'.ii  in  regard  to  the'  Trinity, 
which  he  Mas  supposed  to  have  \vritteii 
in  consequence  of  a  special  revelation, 
was  used  in  opposition  to  the  Arians  in 
the  fourth  century.  The  circumstance 
that  it  was  to  be  foimd  in  the  Church  of 
Neo-Civsareain  his  own  hand-writing,  was 
appealed  to  in  proof  of  it.s  genuineness. 
But  although  the  first  part  of  the  con- 
fession, in  which  the  peculiar  characteris- 
tics of  the  Origenian  doctrines  appear, 
might  be  genuine,  yet  the  second  part  is 
clearly  a  later  addition,  for  it  contains 
decisions,  which  were  tlioronghly  foreign 
to  the  school  of  Origen,  and  which  first 
proceeded  from  the  controversies  with 
the  Arians  in  the  fourth  century. 

Among  the  violent  opponents  of  the 
Origenistic  school  we  have  already  men- 
tioned Methodius,  at  first  bishop  of 
Olympus  in  Lycia,  and  afterwards  of 
Tyre,  a  martyr  in  the  persecution  of  Dio- 
clesian;  but  still  he  appears  not  to  have 
conducted  himself  towards  that  school 
always  in  the  same  manner.  Eusebius 
of  Caesarea,  in  his  continuation  of  the 
Apology  of  Pamphilius,  was  able  to  ap- 
peal to  the  circumstance,  that  Metliodius 
contradicted  what  he  had  formerly  said 
in  praise  of  Origen.;}:  The  ecclesiastical 
historian,  Socrates,  on  the  contrary,  says,§ 
that  3Iethodius,  who  had  formerly  de- 
clared against  Origen,  in  his  dialogue,  en- 


•  Vita  Gregor.  c.  27. 

j  The  canonical  letter,  which  we  have,  of  this 
Gregory,  shows  well  that  in  the  conversion  of 
lame  mas.ses  of  people  mucli  may  have  \yccn 
merely  .something  external;  for  he  speaks  here  of 
persons,  who  made  u.se  of  the  confusion  which 
arose  from  the  devastations  of  the  Goths  in  the 
regions  of  Pontus,  in  order  to  reap  advanta(?o 
from  the  general  calamity,  and  even  to  jilunder 
their  own  countrymen.  Tiiis  letter  at  the  same 
time  gives  evidence  of  Gregory's  watchful  zeal  for 
morality. 

i  Apud  Hicronym,  I.  i.  Kufin.  Hieron.  opp. 
Ed.  Marlianay,  t.  iv.  f.  3.^)9.  Ciuomodo  ansus  mt 
Methodius  nunc  contra  Origencm  scriU'rc,  qui 
ha3c  et  h.Tc  de  Origenis  loquulua  est  dogiualibus  ? 

§  Lib.  iv.  c.  13. 


452 


titled  Sekuv,  had  revoked  it  all,  and  had 
testified  his  admiration  of  him.  There 
must  be  some  foundation  in  truth  for  this 
twofold  story.  Eusebius  and  Socrates 
deduced  their  judgment  about  Methodius 
from  his  own  expressions ;  but  their 
chronological  determinations  in  regard 
to  these  writings  apparently  did  not  rest 
on  historical  facts,  but  they  here  followed 
only  their  subjective  notions,  and  in  such 
matters  the  ancients  were  not  accurate. 
In  the  Symposion  of  Methodius,  which 
we  are  just  about  to  mention,  he  appears 
by  no  means  an  adherent  of  the  letter  of 
the  Church  doctrine,  but  there  is  shown 
in  that  work  an  inclination  to  theoso- 
phical  views,  and  a  predominant  affection 
for  the  allegorical  interpretation  of  the 
Bible,  and  there  appears  also  much  that 
is  congenial  to  the  turn  of  Origen's 
mind ;  there  are  certainly  expressions 
which  at  least  favour  the  doctrine  of  the 
pre-existence  of  souls.*  Much  also  ap- 
pears, which  is  altogether  at  variance 
with  the  doctrines  of  Origen ;  as,  for  ex- 
ample, a  certain  Chiliasm.f  It  may  easily 
be  imagined,  that  Methodius,  a  man  of 
no  systematic  habit  of  thought,  was  at- 
tracted at  first  by  many  of  the  views  and 
the  writings  of  Origen,  which  corre- 
sponded to  his  own  favourite  opinions  and 
to  his  own  taste,  but  was  afterwards  on 
that  very  account,  the  more  shocked  by 
that,  which  in  the  system  of  Origen  was 
contrary  to  his  oivn  disposition  and  his 
own  doctrinal  principles. 

The  most  important  and  the  most  au- 
thentic written  monument  of  this  Me- 
thodius is  his  Feast  of  the  ten  Virgins, 
in  eleven  dialogues,  containing  a  com- 
mendation of  single  life,  which  is  often 
highly  exaggerated. 

That  treatise,  however,  which  we  have 
under  the  name  of  Methodius  on  the 
freedom  of  the  tcilJ,  [tti^i  uvre^ovaiov,) 
belongs  rather  to  the  Christian  teacher 
Maximus,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Scp- 
timius  Scverus,J  than  to  Methodius  ;§  it 
is  an  attack  on  the  Gnostic  dualism. 

The  presbyter  Pamphilus,  a  man  of 
Cscsarea  in  Palestine,  distinguished  by  his 
zeal  for  piety  and  knowledge,  came  for- 
ward as  a  defender  of  Origen  against  the 
charges  of   heresy  brought  against  him 


INTERCOURSE    "WITH    ORIGEN. 


by  Methodius.  He  founded  at  Csesarea 
an  Ecclesiastical  library,  vvliich,  as  late  as 
the  fourth  century,  contributed  much  to 
the  promotion  of  learned  studies.  Every 
friend  of  knowledge,  and  especially  every 
one  to  whom  the  thorough  and  funda- 
mental study  of  the  Bible  was  an  object, 
found  with  him  every  kind  of  assistance, 
and  he  endeavoured  to  multiply,*  to  ex- 
tend, and  correct  the  manuscripts  of  the 
Bible.  He  made  presents  of  many  Bibles, 
even  to  women,  whom  he  saw  much 
busied  in  the  reading  of  Scripture.!  He 
established  a  theological  school.f  in  which 
the  study  of  Scripture  was  carried  on 
with  great  earnestness. §  The  learned 
Eusebius,  who  was  indebted  for  every 
thing  to  Pamphilus,  and  looked  upon 
him  as  friend,  and  almost  as  a  father, 
probably  came  forth  from  this  school. 
Pamphilus  imparted  to  his  scholars  his 
own  veneration  for  Origen,  as  the  pro- 
moter of  Christian  knowledge;  and  he 
endeavoured  to  oppose  the  narrow-mind- 
ed spirit,  which  proceeded  from  those 
who  branded  Origen  with  the  name  of 
heretic.  While  the  blind  zeal  of  these 
people,  as  Pamphilus  says,  went  so  far 
that  they  pronounced  sentence  of  condem- 
nation at  once  on  every  one,  who  only  so 
much  as  busied  himself  with  the  writings 
of  Origen,  Pamphilus  during  his  impri- 
sonment in  the  persecution  of  Diocletian 
in  the  year  309,||  wrote  in  common  with 


•  Orat.  ii.  Theophil.  §  5.    f  Orat.  ix.  §  5. 

i  Euseb.  V.  27.  Hieronym.  de  Vir.  Ilhist.  c. 
47.  This  Maximus  can  hardly  be  the  same  as 
the  bishop  of  Jerusalem  of  the  same  name  men- 
tioned ill  Euseli.  V.  12. 

4  See  on  this  subject  my  "Genetic  Develop- 
ment of  the  Gnostic  Systems,"  p.  206. 


*  See  Montfaucon.  Catalog.  MSS.  Bibliothec. 
Coislinian.  p.  261. 

■f  Eusebius  says  of  him  in  his  life  of  him,  ap. 
Hieronym.  adv.  Rufinum,  1.  i.  p.  358-9,  vol.  iv.: 
"  Quis  studiosorum  amicus  non  fuit  Pamphili  1 
si  quos  videbat  ad  victum  necessariis  indigere, 
prrebebat  large  quce  poterat.  Scripturas  quoque 
sanctas  non  ad  legendum  tantum ;  sed  ct  ad 
habendum  tribuebat  promptissime.  Nee  solum 
viris,  sed  et  feminis,  quas  vidisset  lectioni  deditas. 
Unde  et  multos  codices  prajparabat,  ut,  quum 
nccessitas  poscisset,  volcntibus  largiretur. 

t  Euseb.  vii.  32,  cruvia-TucrttTo  t//-/T§/y2w. 

§  Eus.  de  Martyr.  Palaestinfe,  c.  4. 

II  A  proof  of  the  influence  of  Pamphilus  on  the 
neighbourhood  around  him  is  given  by  the  case  of 
his  slave  Porphyrius,  a  young  man  of  eighteen 
years  of  age,  whom  he  educated  witli  parental 
afl'ection,  and  for  whose  religious,  moral,  and 
spiritual  edification  he  provided  in  every  way ; 
and  he  had  communicated  to  him  an  ardent  love 
for  the  Redeemer.  When  Porphyrius  heard  the 
sentence  of  death  pronounced  against  his  beloved 
master,  he  prayed  that  it  might  be  conceded 
to  him  to  show  the  last  proof  of  love  to  him,  by 
burying  his  corpse  after  the  execution  of  the  sen- 
tence had  taken  place.  This  request  at  once  ex- 
cited the  wrath  of  the  fanatical  governor.  And 
as  he  now  steadfastly  avowed,  that  he  was  a 
Christian,  and  waa  anxioas  to  sacrifice  himself,  he 


CONCLUSION.  453 

his  scholar  Eusebius,*a  work  destined  to  j  lanced  between  the  opposite  extremes  of 
the  defence  of  Origen,  and  this  defence  a  carnal  and  literal,  and  a  capricious  and 
was  addressed  to  tlie  confessors  con-  allcirorizinsr,  interpretation  of  the  IJible. 
demned  to  labour  in  the  mines.  After  Learned  Presbyters  in  the  Anliochian 
the  martyrdom  of  Pamphilus,  Eusebius  j  Church,  who  busied  themselves  willi  par- 
added  a  sixth  book  to  the  five  already  ex-  ticular  zeal  in  the  study  of  liiblical  in- 
isting  of  the  uncompleted  work.  The  !  terpretalion,  may  be  looked  upon  as  the 
first  book  of  tliis  Apology,  with  the  ex- j  first  promoters  of  this  school,  especially 


ception  of  some  Greek  fragments,  we  hav 
in  the  free  translation  of  Rufinus.t 

The  example  of  Pamphilus  shows  us, 
how,  from  one  like  Origen,  who  embraced 
and  united  so  much  together,  not  only  a 


Dorotheus  and  Lucian,  of  whom  the  lat- 
ter sutTcred  martyrdom  in  the  persecution 
of  Diocletian,  early  in  A.  D.  312.* 

Thus  we  see  here,  as  the  result  of  the 
historical  development  of  this  period,  the 


speculative  spirit  in  doctrinal  matters  pro-  |  formation,  the  transition  into  one  another, 
ceeded,  but  also  a  profound  study  of  the  j  and  the  oppositions  of  dilfercnt  theologi- 
Bible  and  a  careful  treatment  of  the  letter  i  cal  dispositions,  from  the  co-operation 
of  the  word,  however  much  this  letter  and  opposition  of  which  with  each  other, 
may  appear  to  be  opposed  to  his  licentious  i  the  further  development  of  the  Christian 
method  of  allegorizing.  Apparently  also,  j  doctrine,  as  the  leaven  for  the  whole  na- 
the  instance  of  the  Egyptian  bishop  He-  j  turc  of  man^  was  destined  to  proceed ;  a 
sychius  is  to  be  traced  to  the  same  source,   development  and  purifying  process  which 


who  set  on  foot  a  new  and  corrected  re- 
cension of  the  text  of  the  Alexandrian 
version,  the  prevalent  one  in  Egypt,J  and 
who  suirered§  martyrdom,  probably  in  the 
persecution  of  Diocletian,  A.  D.  310,  or 
311;  and  lastly,  in  part  also  to  the  in- 
fluence of  Origen  was  owing  the  seed  of 
a  new  theological  school  at  Antioch, 
which  received  its  full  development  only 
in  the  course  of  the  fourth  century,  from 
which  is  derived  the  sound  hermeneuti- 
cal  and  exegetical  direction  properly  ba- 


was  most  cruelly  tortured,  and  at  last,  with  his 
flesh  entirely  torn  from  his  bones,  he  was  led  to  the 
stake.  He  bore  every  thins^  with  firmness,  after  he 
had  only  once,  when  the  fire  touched  him  for  the 
first  time,  called  to  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God,  for  help. 
Euseb.  de  Martyr.  Palsestinas,  c.  ii.  p.  338. 

*  The  accusation  of  the  passionate  Jerome, 
that  Rufmus  falsely  attributes  such  a  work  to 
Pamphilus,  deserves  no  credit. 

•j-  The  loss  of  the  Biography  of  Pamphilus  by 
Eusebius  is  deeply  to  be  lamented.     [N.  B.   The 

German  word  here  translated 'free,' is  willkUrlich    by ter,  tantum  in  Scripiurarum    studio  lalwravit, 
— arbitrary,  or  capricious. — H.  J.  R.]  ut  us<jue  nunc  quicdam  eicmplaria  Scriptururum 

%  Hieronym.  adv.  Rufin.  1.  ii.  42.5.  Lucianeanunrupcntur.     This  treatise  isalsocitod 

§  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  1.  viii.  c.  13.  f.  308.  j  as  Hicron.  de  Vir.  lUustribus.— H.  J.  K.] 


passes  on  from  one  generation  to  another, 
and  which  can  be  brought  to  its  destined 
end  by  nothing  but  the  everlasting  wis- 
dom, which  alone  searches  the  depths  of 
the  free  spirit,  and  which  alone  the  free 
spirit  follows  without  prejudice  to  its 
freedom. 


*  Lucian  made  a  new  recension  of  the  cor- 
reeled  text  of  the  Alexandrian  version,  and  appa- 
rently also  of  the  INew  Testament.  The  manu- 
scripts prepared  according  to  this  text  are  called 
AwKa«vs/a.  Euseb.  [Hieronym.?]  de  Vir.  Illustr. 
77.  adv.  Rufin.  1.  ii.  425.  vol.  iv.  We  are  un- 
able  to  determine  with  certainty  what  is  to  be  l>e- 
lieved  about  the  early  connection  between  Lucian 
and  Paul  of  Samosata,  as  the  account  of  it  which 
we  have,  Theodoret.  Hist.  Eccles.  1.  i.  c.  4.  from 
Alexander,  hishoj)  of  .Mexandria,  is  suspicious  on 
account  of  party-prejudices  from  controversial  mo- 
tives. [In  regard  to  Lucian,  I  find  in  the  edition  of 
Jerome  by  Victorius  the  following  passage,  vol.  i. 
p.  373,  in  the  Catalogus  Script.  Eccles. : — Lucia- 
nus,  vir  disertissimus,  Antiochenas  ecclesia-  prcs- 


THE    END. 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION 
AND  CHURCH  DURING  THE  FIRST  THREE 
CENTURIES. 

INTRODUCTION. 

General  view  of  the  reliifious  state  of  the 
Roman,  Grecian,  and  Jewish  world,  at 
the  time  of  the  first  appearance  and  early 
diffusion  of  Christianity  .        page  () 

Christianity  «)nstantly  mauitaiiis  the  same  rela- 
tion to  human  nature;  a  leaven  destined  to 
penetrate  the  whole  mass — It  showed  itself 
peculiarly  such  at  the  season  of  its  first  ap- 
pearance    ......  9 

Religious  condition  of  the  heathen  world  in 
Rome  and  Greece  .        .        9 — 25 

The  idolatry  of  nature  in  heathenism — No  reli- 
gion for  mankind  in  general  in  heathenism, 
only  state-religions  and  religions  adapted  to 
particular  nations         .         .         .         .         10 

Esoteric  and  exoteric  religion — Fraus  Pia,  Poly- 
bius,  Strabo,  Plutarch,  Seneca       .         .         11 

Unbelief — ScotHng — Scepticism — Deism — Pan- 
theism— Pliny  the  elder,  the  representative  of 
the  latter 14 

Desire  after  some  definite  faith;  this  points  to- 
wards Christianity — Errors  through  fanati- 
cism   15 

Transition  from  unbelief  to  superstition,  painted 
by  Plutarch 17 

Cold,  stoic  resignation  generates  pride — desire 
after  an  eternal  life  reasoned  away  by  the 
Stoics 18 

Platonic  philosophy — Spiritualization  of  Poly- 
theism— It  prepares  the  way,  as  it  often  did,  for 
the  appearance  of  Christianity      .         .  19 

The  popular  religions,  however,  still  unimproved  ; 
hence  superstition  and  enthusiasm — .Mexander 
of  Abonoteichos  and  Apollonius  of  Tyana    22 

The  inquiring  Clement,  who  sought  and  found  23 

It  is  the  Gospel  alone  which  can  triumph  over  un- 
belief, superstition,  and  enthusiasm        .         24 

Religious  condition  of  the  Jews        25 — 39 

Judaism  objectively  a  Divine  religion,  but  yet 
only  adapted  to  one  stage  of  human  develoj)- 
ment 2.5 

•Adherence  to  the  Utter  without  a  iK'netration  into 
the  spirit  of  the  old  religion ;  hence  carnal  pride 
and  a  carnal  view  of  freedom — Judas  (iali- 
locus — Intermixture  of  worldly  and  spiritual ; 
source  of  wild  fanaticism     ...         25 

Lifeless  orthodoxy— Pharisees;  False  illumina- 
tion— Sadducces;  Mysticism — Essencs         26 

Peculiar  character  of  the  Jewish  schools  of 
Alexandria     .....        29 — 31 

Hellenizing,  Jewish  scoffer  in  Philo's  works — He 
himself  calls  the  Jews  prophets  and  priesU  for 
all  mankind 30 


The  endeavour  to  defend  was  seduced  into  a  false 
hermeneutic — Philo's  own  conU'mplative  cha- 
racter in  religious  things      .         .         /         31 

Idealism  despises  the  grammatical  inteq)rctation 
of  Scripture,  and  thus  creates  arbitrary  dog- 
matism in  interpretation       .         ,         .         .32 

This  is  opposed  by  anlhropopathism         .         3:{ 

Philo's  distinction  l)etween  the  humanizing  and 
the  not-humanizing  schools,  and  hence  also  be- 
tween esoteric  and  exoteric  doctrines     .         34 

The  same  contemplative  spirit  crealcsTheosophicrv 
ascetic  societies — The  Therapeutjc  not  a  branch 
of  the  Essenes  ....         3;') 

General  result  .        .        .        3G — 37 

Carnal  mind  of  the  Jews  always  at  variance  with 
Christianity  on  the  one  hand ;  and  on  the  other, 
a  capability  of  receiving  the  Gospel,  more  to  Iks 
found  in  Phariseeism  and  Essenism  than  in 
Sadduceeism 3fi 

The  Alexandrian  Jews  have  their  kind  of  Gnosis, 
but  they  are  always  wanting  in  poorness  of 
spirit 38 

Extension  of  Judaism  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans. 

The  Jews  make  proselytes  of  Righteousness  and 
of  the  Gate  among  the  heathen  ;  the  latter  sort 
better  disposed  towards  Christianity      .         39 

SECTION  I. 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH 
TO    THE    UNCHRISTIAN    WORLD  40 102 

I.  Propagation  of  Christianity  40 — 'lO 

[»4.]  On  the  Propagation  of  Christianity  in 
general,  the  obstacles  which  opposed  it, 
the  means  and  causes  hy  which  it  was 
furthered        ....         40 — 1(1 

Christianity,  attaching  itself  to  every  thing  that 
is  pure  in  human  nature,  is  a  sword  of  the 
Spirit  to  the  ungodly ;  and  hence  its  varied 
contentions  with  prevailing  manners  and  stale- 
religions — The  Gospel  a  religion  for  the  poor  in 
spirit,  not  for  the  proud        .         .         .         40 

Goeta;  oppose  Christianity — Miracles  pave  the 
way  for  the  inward  power  of  the  Divine 
word 41 

Effects  of  grace  among  the  Christians,  related  by 
Justin  Martyr,  Ireiupus,  ami  Origen       .         43 

Inward  Divine  power  of  Christianity  l)eaming 
through  their  conduct — The  most  powerful 
means  of  conversion  .         .         .      *  44 

Women,  hoys,  and  slave*  cause  the  light  of  the 
Gos|>el  to  hhirie — Christianity  is  able  to  let 
itself  down  to  all  capacities — A  leaven  which 
is  to  reform  all  human  nature        .         .         45 

[B.]  Propagation  of  Christianity  in  par- 
ticular districts        .         .         .    '     4(3 — 50 

In  .\sia— Christianity   first   preached    in   cities — 


456 


ANALYTICAL   TAfeLE    OF    CONTENTS. 


Story  of  Abgarus  of  EJessa ;  improbable — First 
certain  trace  of  Christianity  there  under  Abgar 
BarManu,  A.  D.  170  .         .         .         46 

The  Gospel  spread  in  Arabia  by  St.  Paul,  perhaps 
also  by  Bartholomew;  and  in  the  second  and 
third  centuries  by  PantiEnus  and  Origen        47 

St.  'J^'homas  reported  to  have  preached  in  the  East 
Indies 48 

In  Africa — An  old  tradition  makes  St.  Mark  the 
founder  of  the  Church  in  Alexandria;  thence 
the  Gospel  reached  Cyrene,  perhaps  also  ^^thi- 
opia;  afterwards  Carthage,  and  all  proconsular 
Africa 48 

In  Europe — Rome,  Lyons,  Vienne,  (A.  D.  177) — 
Chief  quarters  for  the  spreading  of  the  Gospel 
in  Gaul — Saturninus  hence  to  Germany — In 
Spain  perhaps  from  St.  Paul — In  Britain  from 
Asia  Minor 49 

II.  Persecution  of  Christianity  50 — 102 
INTRODUCTION. 

First  upon  the  causes  of  this  persecu- 
tion         50 — 54 

Notions  of  Roman  toleration  to  be  limited — Ge- 
neral rights  of  man  first  acknowledged  by 
Christianity — The  prevailing  political  views, 
based  on  the  state-religion,  suspect  political 
machinations  under  Christianity,  as  being  a 
"religio  nova,  illicita,"  and  without  any  old 
form  of  worship  .         •         .         .         50 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Christians  are  accused  of 
not  taking  sufficient  interest  in  the  state,  of  not 
offering  worship  to  the  emperors,  of  refusing  to 
sen'e  in  the  army,  and  hence  they  are  called 
"hostes  Caisarum,  hostes  populi  Romani,  in- 
fructuosi  in  negotio"  ...         52 

Christians  also  the  victims  of  popular  fury ;  aris- 
ing from  blind  prejudice — "Non  pluit  Deus, 
due  ad  Christianos,"  but  fomented  by  priests, 
Goetffi,  &c .'         53 

[A.}  Persecution  by  the  hand  of  power. — 
Varied  condition  of  the  Christian  Church 
under  different  emperors         .         54 — 93 

Tertullian's  story  of  a  proposal  to  the  senate  by 
Tiberius,  in  regard  to  Christ  and  the  Christians, 
cannot  be  true     .....         54 

Christians  often  confounded  with  Jews,  and  hence 
banished  from  Rome  by  Claudius,  A.  D.  53, 
together  with  the  Jews,  according  to  Suetonius, 
"impulsore  Christo,"  &c.     ...         55 

Cruel  persecution  under  Nero,  A.  D.  64 ;  its  pro- 
bable origin — The  fire  at  Rome     .         .         55 

Under  Domitian,  from  A.  D.  81,  the  accusation 
of  conversion  to  Christianity  joined  with  the 
"ciimrn  majestatis"    ....         56 

The  justice-loving  Nerva,  A.  D.  96,  forbids  slaves 
to  accuse  their  masters         ...         56 

Trajan's  law  against  tTnt^mi  used  against  Chris- 
tians— Pliny  the  younger,  the  governor,  with 
all  his  love  of  investigation,  only  a  narrow- 
minded  politician  after  all ;  his  report,  A.  D. 
I'iO — Hence  the  unhappy  condition  of  the 
Christians 57 

Hadrian  forbids  tumultuous  attacks,  but  favours 
legal  prosecutions  against  Christians,  merely 
for  being  Christians;  Christianity  still  a  "leligio 
illicita" — During  this  reign  Barchochab  perse- 
cutes the  Christians  in  Palestine  .         58 

Wretched  condition  from  A.  D.  138 — The  En> 
peror  Antoninus  Pius  mildly  disposed  towards 


Christians,  but  the  rescript  tt^i;  to  Konzv  txc 
'AsT/otf  cannot  come  from  him        .         .         60 

Persecution  of  the  Christians  under  M.  Aurelius, 
who  in  his  honest  endeavour  after  deep  self- 
knowledge,  was  always  stopped  by  his  stoic 
fatalism,  as  well  as  through  a  certain  fanaticism 
of  mind — Courage  of  the  Christian  faith      60 

(a.)  Persecution  in  Smyrna,  A.  D.  167 — Poly- 
carp  on  the  funeral  pile  of  his  martyrdom 
praises  the  Lord — The  rage  of  the  people  a 
little  cooled 63 

(h.)  At  Lyons,  A.  D.  177 — Bishop  Pothinus  dies 
as  a  martyr  in  prison — The  Divine  power  of 
faith  efficacious  even  in  tender  and  weak  ves- 
sels, like  PonticusandBlandina — Humilitypre- 
serves  the  martyrs  at  Lyons,  as  only  disciples — 
They  decline  being  called  martyrs,  but  call  them- 
selves only  weak  confessors  .         ,         65 

Symphorianus  dies  as  a  martyr  at  Autun,  and  is 
cheered  on  to  death  by  his  mother         .         68 

The  '•  legio  fulminea,"  A.  D.  174,  not  a  fiction — 
Examination  of  it       .         .         .         .         68 ' 

The  wicked  Comniodus,  from  A.  D.  180,  rendered 
favourable  to  the  Christians  by  Marcia — The  po- 
pular fury  subsides,  and  persecutions  cease       69 

The  fury  of  the  populace  again  awakened  after  the 
murder  of  Commodus — Persecutions  under 
Septimius  Severus  and  Caracalla  .         70 

Single  characteristic  traits  of  Christian  faith  shown 
forth  in  Speratus,  and  in  the  firmness  of  two 
women,  Perpetua  and  Felicitas     .         .         71 

Repose  of  the  Christians  under  Heliogabalus  and 
Severus  (from  A.D.  219— 235)— Julia  Mam- 
msea  and  Origen  ....         73 

Christianity  still  a  "  religio  illicita"         .         74 

Wretched  condition  under  Maximinus  Thrax,  till 
A.  D.  244 — Fury  of  the  populace         .         74 

Repose  under  the  mild  Philip,  the  Arabian  (from 
A.  D.  244,)  but  this  emperor  no  Christian — 
Origen's  view  of  the  persecution  and  his  insight 
into  futurity 74 

His  prophecies  verified — Persecution  of  Decius, 
A.  D.  250,  proves  an  excitement  to  the  dormant 
activity  of  the  Church  during  its  long  repose — 
"  Libellatici,  acta  facientes" — Glorious  traits  of 
Christian  courage — Numidicus  at  Carthage   75 

Cyprian  of  Carthage  and  other  bishops  withdraw 
themselves  at  first  from  their  Churches,  not 
from  cowardice ;  but  they  take  care  of  them 
even  while  absent — The  persecution  gradually 
increases  till  A.D.  251  ...         78 

After  a  short  respite,  a  pestilence  again  awakens 
the  fury  of  the  people  under  Gallus,  A.  D.  252 — 
The  bishops  Cornelius  and  Lucius  at  Rome  give 
testimony  to  the  faith  and  are  martyred  79 

New  persecution  under  Valerianus,from  A.D.  257 
— Sintus,  bishop  of  Rome,  and  Cyprian  of  Car- 
thage, seal  their  fidelity  with  their  blood — The 
last  words  of  Cyprian,  "  God  be  thanked"      8(J 

The  edict  of  Gallienus,  A.  D.  259,  recognises  the 
Christian  Church  as  a  legally  existing  corpora- 
tion, and  Christianity  as  a  "  religio  licita" — 
First  promulged  in  the  East  and  in  Egypt,  A. 
D.  261 — His  superstitious  successor,  Aurelian, 
prevented  by  this  from  persecuting — His  mur- 
der, A.D  275 82 

Repose  and  increase  of  the  Church  during  forty 
years — Diocletian,  sole  emperor  from  284  and 
286,  in  conjunction  with  Maximus,  shows  him- 
self at  first  favourable  to  Christianity — His  edict 
against  the  Manichees,  A.  D.  296         .         83 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


457 


Galcrius,  the  slave  of  blinil  superstition,  seeks  for 
accusations  against  the.  Christians  ;  A.  D.  298, 
he  obtains  a  decree  that  all  soldiers  must  offer  sa- 
criiice — Many  Christians  give  up  their  military' 
rank. — Tlie  Centurion  Marcellus,  on  account  of 
the  "  militia  Cliristi,"  refuses  the  "  militia  impe- 
ratorum,"  and  is  sentenced  to  death  85 

Galerius  at  last,  A.  D.  303,  persuades  Diocletian 
to  issue  a  general  edict  against  the  Christians 
— The  splendid  church  of  IS'icomcdia,  in  Bi- 
thynia,  plundered — The  intended  annihilation 
of  the  Scriptures  defeated  liy  the  power  of  God 
— Humane  oflicers  act  mildly  in  the  execution 
of  the  edict 87 

Traditores  among  the  Christians — Enthusiastic 
zeal  of  faith — The  union  of  simplicity  and  pru- 
dence unjustly  stigmatised  as  cowardice         88 

Individual  traits  of  courage — The  young  Victoria 
and  the  hoy  Hilarianus        ...         89 

A  fire  in  ISicomedia — Its  origin  uncertain — Cru- 
elty against  the  Christians  inflamed  by  political 
jealousy — Fury  against  the  clergy  in  particular, 
A.  D.  304 — Edict  that  all  the  Christians  should 
sacrifice-^Heathenism  appears  to  triumph,  but 
this  triumph  is  soon  lost  again      .         .         90 

Constantius  Chlorus  favourable  to  the  Christians 
— Particularly  active  from  A.  D.  305,  when 
Diocletian  and  Herculius  resigned         .         91 

Maximinus,  on  the  contrary,  fanatical  and  cruel — 
From  A.  D.  308,  a  new  season  of  repose — A 
new,  severe  edict  soon  makes  its  appearance,  in 
order  to  uphold  the  heathen  superstition  in  its 
whole  compass — Thirty-nine  confessors  are  ex- 
ecuted in  the  mines  of  Palestine — This  was  the 
last  blood  shed  in  this  persecution — Galerius 
being  brought  to  a  proper  sense  of  the  matter 
by  severe  illness,  A.  D.311,  issues  a  remarkable 
edict,  by  which  this  last  bloody  struggle  of  the 
(.Christian  Church  in  the  Roman  empire  is  con- 
cluded         92 

[^]  Opposition  to  Christianity  by  heathen 
writings       ....        93 — 102 

The  worshijiping  of  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth  al- 
ways a  stumbling  block  to  superstition  and  to 
light-n)inded  unbelief  ....  93 

The  self-righteous  Stoics  see  in  Christianity  only 
a  religion  for  the  people — The  religious  idealism 
of  Plato  brings  men  of  profoundness  nearer  to 
the  Gospel,  but  it  calls  forth  a  still  more  vio- 
lent opposition  to  it  with  those  who  have  not 
self-denial  enough  to  renounce  their  philosophi- 
cal superiority  in  religion     ...         9-1 

The  superficial  Platonist,  Celsus,  apparently  con- 
temporary with  M.  Aurelius,  attacks  Chris- 
tianity in  his  Ac>oc  '^kyi'ix;,  a  sarcastic  work, 
abounding  in  self-contradiction — How  he  mis- 
takes all  Christianity,  and  especially  Christian 
humility — Christianity  alone  can  unite  the  two 
opposilcs,  self-abasement  and  elevation  in 
God  .         • 95 

Another  more  profound  opponent  of  Christianity 
in  Porphyry,  the  Phoenician,  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  third  century — One  of  his  works 
was,  "  A  System  of  Theology,  deduced  from 
the  old  (si)urious)  Oracles,"  Iljg/  'nit  ix  K'.yimi 
c'>i^s"'-?'ac — He,  however,  contradicts  himself, 
sometimes  wishing  to  appear  a  philosopher  in 
religion,  while  at  others  he  is  quite  devoted  to 
blind  superstitious  idolatry — The  oracles  rela- 
tive to  Christ 99 

58 


Hierocles,  governor  of  Bilhynia,  the  last  writer 
in  opposition  to  Christianity  of  this  jHiriod,  in 
his  book  entitled,  A-.-^-.t  oiKtMihu;  tt^-.;  t<.ui 
\eiirrirti'^:,  "The  Discourse  of  a  Lover  of 
Truth,  addressed  to  the  (Christians" — It  id  a 
pity  he  did  not  speak  the  truth,  and  did  not 
refrain  from  telling  the  most  shamelesit  lies 
of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  witljout  examina- 
tion   101 

Concludinfj  remark  on  the  manner  in  which 
the  apologies  of  the  Christians  were  ge- 
nerally conduct^'d. 
The  heathen  attacks  on  Christianity  wore  answer- 
ed  from    the   time   of  Hadrian,   by  defensive 
treatises  on  the  part  of  the  Christians  (Apolo- 
gies.)    These  consisted  partly  of  general  and 
extensive  developments  of  Christian  doctrines, 
I      partly  of  particular  defences,  addressed  to  Con- 
j      sules,  Prajsides,  &c. — Tliese  had  but  little  efl'ect 
j      in  general — Christianity  being  at  variance  with 
'      the  "  disciplina  Romana,"  always  ap|teared  to 
Roman  statesmen  a  feverish  and  dangerous  cn- 
'      thusiasm 10 1 

I  SECTION  11. 

HISTORY  OF  THE  FORMATION  OF  THE  CHl'RCH, 
I         CHIRCH    DISCIPLINE,    AND    CHURCH     DIVI- 

I      sioNs  ....         10-2— 143 

I.  The    history   of   the   formation   of   the 
Church      ....        102—127 
j  1.)  The  history  of   the  formation  of  con- 
j      gregations  in  general  .         102 — 1 1(5 

I  Two  periods  are  to  be  distinguished,  (1)  The 
I  epoch  of  their  formation  in  the  time  of  the 
i      apostles;  (2)  Their  progress  to  the  end  of  this 

j      period 102 

I  [c/5]  The  first  foundation  of  the  constitution 
of  Christian  Churches   in   the  apostolic 

age 10-2—109 

The  Gospel  conducting  all  men  to  the  same  com- 
munion with  God  through  (.'hrist,  excludes,  by 
its  very  nature,  any  peculiar  caste  of  priests^— 
One  High-priest,  one  Mediator  for  all — Many 
gifts,  one  Spirit  .  .  .  .  102 
Elevating  form  of  the  original  constitution  of  the 
Church  in  the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corin- 
thians        104 

Outward  form  is  necessary,  hut  no  one  definite 
I  form,  and  least  of  all,  the  monarchical — The 
monarchical  form  of  Church  constitution  con- 
]  tradicts  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  which  admits 
of  only  one  monarch,  Christ — The  Go8i»cl  con- 
I  stantly  points  to  the  feeling  of  mutual  waiiU  105 
'.  Form  naturally  grafted  on  the  Jewish  and  nither 
j  aristocraticai  constitution  of  congregation ; 
!  D'^pT'  T5«5/2vT!g!!«,  elders;  VD^*!©'  h"'/^'' 
j       »'.<,  Tf;srT»Ts;  'rui  uitK<^c»i,  »Tr9-«3.TM,  presidents, 

I      bishops 106 

j  \u^iiT/jtx  iiJ%TKiXiM,  and  KuStprna^ieiK,  talent  for 
teaching  and  for  governing  in  the  Church,  not 
equal  in  all  men         .  •  .  .  106 

Deacons  and  deaconesnes — The  latter  partic\ilarly 
I      useful    in    the  East  for  the  purjiosc  of  intro- 
ducing Christianity  into  the  interior  of  fami- 

I      lies 107 

j  Election  to  Church-oflices  maile  by  the  presbytera 
after  gathciiiig  the  congregation  together     107 

'  2R 


458 


[B]  The  changes  which  took  place  in  the 
constitution  of  the  Christian  Church  after 
the  apostohc  age        .         .         109 — 116 

The  chief  changes  relate  to  three  points;  (1)  the 
development  of  the  Monarchico-episcopal  form 
of  Church-government;  (2)  the  formation  of 
an  unevangellc  caste  of  priests;  (3)  the  mul- 
tiplication of  Church  offices       .         .  109 

fl)  The  presbyter,  who  presided  in  the  college  of 
presbyters,  has  exclusively  the  name  iTmrKCTro;, 
out  always  remains  only  the  "primus  inter 
pares"      .         .         .         .         .         .         110 

The  episcopal  system  unfolds  itself  gradually,  and 
maintains  itself  during  the  persecutions — Cy- 
prian, in  this  respect,  acts  quite  in  accordance 
with  tho  spirit  of  his  times — The  episcopal 
system  had  great  advantages  and  also  great  dis- 
advantages, for  .         .         .         .         110 

b)  It  farthered  the  rise  of  a  separate  class  of 
priests  in  the  Christian  Church — the  cause  of 
this;  Selfishness — the  source  of  all  Popery, 
and  the  confusion  between  the  Jewish  and 
Christian  economy — TertuUian  calls  the  bishop 
"summus  sacerdos"  .         .         .  Ill 

The  names  "ordo,  plebs,"  x\;ipoc,  kkx^uoi,  of 
themselves  naturally  introduce  unevangellc 
relations — Opposition  of  the  evangelic  con- 
science      ,         111 

The  clergy  at  first  maintained  themselves  by 
their  trades — By  degrees  they  were  removed 
from  worldly  business,  but  not  from  worldly 
thoughts ]13 

Election  to  Church  offices,  as  well  as  all  Church 
affairs,  conducted  in  conjunction  with  the  con- 
gregation— "Seniores  plebis,"  not  clergy,  but 
"  persona  ecclesiasticce" — a  remnant  of  the  freer 
spirit  of  the  apostolic  constitution,  which  is  a 
model  for  all  times     .         .         .         .  114 

c)  Multiplication  of  Church  offices ;  Subdeacons, 
"  lectores,"  (uvaj-vaiffTa*,)  aiccxcuQoi,  (acoluthi,) 
"  exorcistar  ;"  Bu^cu^ci,  ttvxw^ci,  "  ostiarii"        116 

2)  The  means  of  Connection  between  sepa- 
rate Churches  one  with  the  other  1 16 — 120 

The  subordination  system  does  not  proceed  from 
a  pure  evangelic  spirit,  which  would  rather 
point  to  a  system  of  sisterly  equality — The 
^w^iTii-n'^Troi,  suffragans,  or  country  bishops,  of 
the  fourth  century,  must  have  come  down  from 
the  earliest  times,  at  first  independent,  after- 
wards subjected  to,  the  bishop  of  the  city — 
Daughter-churches  also  formed  in  cities — Me- 
tropolitans          117 

"  Ecclcsiffi,  sedes  apostolicse,  matrices  ecclesiffi," 
Antioch,  Alexandria,  E[)hesus,  Corinth,  but 
especially  Rome         .         .         .         .         118 

Communication  by  means  of  Church  letters — 
"Literae  formataj,"  jgs^^stT*  TtruTrcejuivu,  ne- 
cessary for  many  causes     •         .         .         119 

Provincial  synods  first  in  Greece,  after  the  model 
of  the  Amphictionic  assemblies — gradually  be- 
come general — Useful,  if  they  are  carried  on  in 
a  real  spirit  of  Christian  humility  ;  hurtful,  as 
soon  as  hierarchical  and  arbitrary  notions  enter 
into  them,  and  wish  to  prescribe  laws  for  the 
Church  for  ever,  without  the  co-operation  of  the 
congregations 119 

3)  The  union  of  the  whole  Church  into  one 
wliole,  compactly  joined  together  in  all  its 
pans,  tho  outward  unity  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  its  representation    120 — 127 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


Blessed  unity  of  the  Church,  a  manifestation  of 
the  unity  of  the  kingdom  of  God — Yet  the 
confusion  between  the  visible  and  the  invisible 
Church,  between  the  form  and  the  substance, 
leads  to  an  overvalue  for  the  outward  unity  of 
the  Church — This  is  most  distinctly  laid  down 
in  his  book  "  De  Unitate  Ecclesife,"  in  which 
there  is  much  truth  mixed  with  some  false  no- 
tions         120 

The  error  of  thinking  a  visible  unity  of  the 
Church  necessarily  leads  to  the  notion  of  the 
necessity  for  that  visible  representation  of  that 
unity — this  is  founded  in  the  pretended  apos. 
tolic  primacy  of  St.  Peter,  which,  however,  is 
entirely  in  contradiction  with  a  sound  interpre- 
tation of  Scripture  and  the  history  of  Christian 
antiquity,  and  especially  with  the  whole  spirit 
of  the  New  Testament  economy — This  cer- 
tainly knew  nothing  of  a  "  Cathedra  Petri"   123 

This  notion  soon  becomes  still  more  noxious — 
The  pretended  primacy  of  St.  Peter  now  be- 
comes transferred  to  the  "Ecclesia  Romana" 
and  its  bishops  for  ever — Roman  ambition  puts 
on  a  spiritual  garb     .         .         .         .  125 

Romish  bishops  call  themselves  "Episcopi  Epis- 
coporum;"  Victor,  A.  D.  190 — Stephanus  re- 
ceives appeals  from  Spain — Opposition  made 
by  Irenaeus — •'  Dissonantia  jejuni!  non  solvit 
consonantium  fidei"  —  Cyprian  and  Firmi- 
lianus 125 

II.  Church  discipline — Excommunication 
from  the  visible  Church  and  re-admission 
into  it  ....         127—132 

The  visible  Church  is  not  merely  meant  to  reveal 
the  kingdom  of  God,  but  to  instruct  and  pre- 
pare men  for  it;  hence,  in  the  visible  Church, 
there  must  always  be  a  mixture  of  genuine  and 
false  Christians — To  human  judgment,  in  this 
respect,  no  decision  was  entrusted,  but  St.  Paul 
himself  entrusts  it,  with  a  wholesome  discipline, 
for  the  Church — "  Excommunicatio,  poeni- 
tentio,  absolutio;"  expulsion,  penitence,  and 
re-admission 127 

Distinction  made  by  the  teachers  of  the  Church 
between  the  absolution  of  the  priest  and  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  by  God  himself    .  129 

Alas!  how  soon  does  human  fancy  confound  the 
outward  with  the  inward !  How  soon  does  a 
foolish  misunderstanding  of  the  power  to  bind 
and  loose  lead  men  into  the  belief  in  a  wretched 
"  opus  operatum'' — The  Lord  gives  the  power 
of  the  keys  to  every  true  preacher  of  the  Gos- 
pel   129 

Distinction  (from  1  John)  between  "  peccata  ve- 
nialia"  and  "  peccata  mortalia,"  or  "  ad  mor- 
tem:" pardonable  sins  and  mortal  sins — 
Contentions  between  the  stricter  and  laxer 
patties 132 

III.  The  history  of  divisions  in  the  Church, 
or  Schisms         .        .        .        132—148 

Distinction  between  schisms  and  heresies  pro- 
perly so  called — The  latter  arise  from  diflerences 
in  doctrine^  the  former  from  differences  in  out- 
ward things 132 

a)  Schism  of  Felicissimus,  which  arose  in 
the  North  African  Church  132 — 141 

The  election  of  Cyprian  as  bishop  awakens  the 
opposition  of  a  party,  headed  by  five  presby- 
ters 132 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


459 


Cyprian,  faithful  as  he  was  in  his  pastoral  capa-  a)  Novatian's  principles  on  the  subject  misropre- 
city,  was  yet  not  sulficiently  on  his  guard  scnted  by  his  enemicH.  but  his  moral  error 
against  the  suggestions  of  spiritual  pride;  in  I      powerfully  opposed  by  Cyprian  •         145 

the  bishop,  appointed  by  God,  he  forgot  the  And  yet  even  Cyprian  waH  unable  to  oppose  the 
man,  weak  and  liable  to  sin        .         .         133  i      principles  of  Novatian  elfectually.  l)ecau»e  ho 

Novatus,  apparently  one  of  the  five  anti-Cyprian  himself  had  not  a  clear  i)erieiition  of  the  only 
presbyters,  ordains  Felicissimus  deacon  by  his  j  real  objective  ground  of  confidence  in  the  for- 
own  authority — This  person  now  becomes  his  !  givencss  of  sins,  namely,  in  the  application  of 
partisan  133  j      the  merits  of  Christ  .         .         .  146 

Cyprian's  withdrawal  from  his  Church,  and  his  b)  Novatian  on  the  idea  of  the  Church — "Tho 
severity  towards  the  "  lapsi"  (fallen  brethren)  Church  ceases  to  be  a  tnie  Church,  when  it 
during  the  Decian  persecution,  give  his  enemies  i      sullcrs  those  who  have  violated  their  baptismal 


an  opportunity  of  scheming  against  him  still 
more  actively    .         .         .         .         .         134 1 

The  "  lapsi,"  supported  by  the  confessors  (con-  I 
fessores)  who  give  them  letters  of  peace  or  , 
communion  (libellos  pacis) — Cyprian's  proper 
zeal  against  the  extravagant  reverence  paid  to 
the  martyrs:  "The  Gospel  makes  the  martyrs, 
not  the  martyrs  the  Gospel         .         .  136 

But  Cyprian  still  is  not  firm  and  consistent 
enough,  he  allows  at  last  the  "  libelli  pacis"  of 
the "  confessores"      .         .         .         .  138 

How  injurious  is  any  compromise  with  a  prevail- 
ing prejudice! — The  Romish  Church  declares 
itself  for  the  milder  party,  pointing  to  the  one 
source  of  forgiveness  of  sins      .         .  138 

Cyprian  appears  at  last  to  conquer,  but  his  hopes 
are  deceived  by  his  exercising  his  episcopal 
power,  in  ordering  a  visitation  to  be  held — Feli- 
cissimus collects  all  the  "  lapsi"  into  his  Church 
(perhaps  in  monte,)  and  gives  them  the  com- 
munion— This  conduct  very  injurious  to  disci- 
pline and  good  order  .         .         .  133 

The  North  Alrican  Synod,  A.  D.  251,  at  length 
puts  down  this  schism,  by  devising  a  happy 
middle  path  in  regard  to  the  "  lapsi ;"  but  still 
the  rebellious  party  choose  Fortunatus  for  bishop 
of  Carthage,  and  look  for  help  from  Rome,  but 
all  their  schemes  are  frustrated  by  the  concord 
of  Cornelius  and  Cyprian  .         .  140 

I)  The  schism  of  Novatian,  which  arose  in 
the  bosom  of  Romish  Church    141 — 148 

This  schism,  as  well  as  that  of  Felicissimus,  arose 
from  a  dilTerence  of  views  on  penance,  only 
that  was  set  on  foot  by  the  laxer  party,  this  by 
the  stricter — The  controversy  about  the  no- 
tion of  the  true  Church  also  entered  into  this 

schism •         ^41 

Novatian's  personal  character,  and  iU  influence, 
on  his  part,  in  the  controversies — The  ascetic. 


covenant  by  gross  sins,  to  remain  in  it,  or  re- 
ceives them  again."  Hence  the  Novatianista 
call  themselves  c't  kiS^u,  the  Pure — this  is 
beautifully  answered  in  a  practical  manner  by 
Cv])rian :  "  The  Lord  alone  has  the  sieve  in  his 

hind" 147 

And  yet,  from  their  dogmatical  indefiniteness  as 
to  the  notions  of  the  visible  and  invisible 
Churches,  the  opponents  of  Novatian  were 
unable  to  combat  his  fundamental  error,  which 
was  deeply  rooted  in  the  confusion  of  those 
idea*,  with  suflicient  power  and  clearness — The 
Catholic  Church  system  comes  forth  triumphant 
at  last  from  these  struggles  .         .         148 

SECTION    III. 

CHRISTIAN    LIFE    AND    WORSHIP  \^A — 214 

I.  Christian  Life  .        .        1')  1—180 

Christianity  a  sanctifying  power — Cyprian — Jus- 
tin Martyr — Origen  .         .         .  151 

Contrast  between  the  Christian  and  the  heathen 
life — This  was  often  very  prominent,  and  yet 
false  Christianity,  dangerous  self-delusion,  false 
self-elevation,  &c. — Tertullian,  Origen,  and 
Cyprian,  against  representations  of  the  magical 
eltects  of  baptism      .         .         .         •         15'- 

Gradual  efficacy  of  Christianity— Carnal  Chris- 
tianity— Defects  in  the  visible  Church— Point 
of  view  from  which  we  ought  to  look  at  these 
first  times 152 

Mutual  names  of  the  Christians — The  brotherly 
kis3— Care  for  the  stranger,  the  sick,  and  the 
poor;  for  old  men,  widows,  and  orphans — Vo- 
luntary Church  contributious— Peculiar  activity 
of  the  Christian  mistress  of  a  family— Collec- 
tions for  foreign  Churches—Examples— Cyprian 
— Dionysius  of  Alexatnlria— Christian  benevo- 
lence in  public  calamities   .         .         *         156 


serious,  and  learned  Novatian,  no  stoic,  having  j  ,p^^  Christians,  with  regard  to  the  laws  of  tho 


received,  after  many  internal  struggles,  merely 
the  "  baptismus  clinicorum,"  the  baptism  of  the 
sick  by  sprinkling— Is  ordained  a  presbyter  by 
Fahianus — He  espouses  the  side  of  the  stricter 
party  as  to  penitence ;  this  excites  the  opposi- 
tion of  Cornelius;  at  first  only  a  contest  of 
principles — Novatian  guided  by  none  but  pure 
motives    .         .         '         •         •         '        ■  , 

Novatus,  an  advocate  at  Carthage  of  the  milder 
principles,  here  joins  the  stricter  party,  at 
the  head  of  which  Novatian  was  placed  as 
bishop •      .    143 

Cornelius  is  accused  by  Novatian  of  being  a 
"  libellaticus"  (one  that  had  received  a  cer- 
tificate of  having  sacrificed)— The  mildness  of 


State — Their  obedience  to  existing  mslitulions 

Collision  between  civil  and  religious  duties — 

Uilferent  views  of   Christians  upon  this  sulv 
ject  ......  •5'J 

Fori)idden  trades — Forbidden  to  visit  the  shows 
of  glatliators,  and  combaU  of  wild  I)east3— For- 
bidden to  be  present  at  panlominui.'*,  plays, 
circus,  Ac— Sophistry  of  Celsus— Tertullian 
on  true  spiritual  joys-^No  one  who  fre.juent.'.l 
plays  was  to  remain  in  Church  communion   1  fi  1 


Dionysius 


which  Novatian  was   placed   as  I  Qhristianity  in  regard  to  slavery— The  tru^ 

highest   freedom   may  be   united  with   Inxlily 

slavery ...'"•'^ 

Christian  administer   a  civil  or    miliUry 

lividetl — One  party  nKainut 

the  Stale 


Two  points  in  controversy,  penance 
the  notion  of  the  true  Church    145- 


May 

I      office? — Opinion 
l"*"^  1       pui)lic   duties — Ojjposilion  U 
and        and  Christianity— Tertullian  and  Celsun  on  tins 
-15ul      point—. \noUier   parly  Jrrc   for   serving  public 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


460 


offices — Grounds  for  and  against  a  Christian 
becoming  a  soldier     .         .         .         .  167 
New  relation  of  the  whole  Christian  life — Con- 
trast of  the  thoughtless  indulgence  and  moody 
seriousness  of  heathenism  with  the  holy  serious- 
ness and  joy  in  the  Holy  Spirit  in  Christianity 
— The  idea  of  monkery  quite  foreign  to  the 
notions   of    Christians   of   those    days — Self- 
chosen  days  of  penance,  prayer,  and  fasting — 
'As-xwTst/,  ru?6sv:< — Origin  and  effects  of  asceti- 
cism— Notion  of  a  true   Christian  Ascetic — 
Alcibiades  the  Ascetic        .         .         .         169 
Vanity  of  dress  among  Christians,  in  opposition 
to  a  partial  asceticism — Germ  of  clerical  celi- 
bacy— Ivmtfdix.'rrji — Voices   raised   against   this 
disposition — Pastor    Hermae — Clemens:    th    o 
«ra)^5//ivsc  TrMvTta;;   spirit   of   evangelical    free- 
dom, particularly  against  the  Montanists,  and 
their  fast  ordinances           .         .         •  173 
Christian  family  life — Marriage — Christian    har- 
mony—  Mixed    marriages  —  Sanction    of    the 
Church  to  conchide  a  marriage             .  175 
Prayer,  the  soul  of  the  Christian  life — Effects — 
Kind  of    Prayer — Times   of  Prayer — Assem- 
blies for  Prayer — Postures  in  prayer   .  177 
Christian  instruction  of  a  family             .         180 
2.)  The  Christian  worship.  (Public  and  ge- 
neral worship  of  God)         .         ,         180 
o)  Nature  of  the  Christian  Avorship  in  ge- 
neral    180 

Spiritual  worship — Contrast  between  Judaism  and 
heathenism,  especially  in  regard  to  visiting  the 

Church 181 

h)  Places  of  congregation  for  the  Chris- 
tians     182 

At  first  in  private  houses,  afterwards  their  proper 
houses  of  assembly — Churches — originally  no 
images  used—Hatred  of  art — Its  cause — Images 
in  domestic  life— Sensible  forms — Images  in 
churches—Sign  of  the  cross        .         .         182 

c)  Times  of  Divine  service,  and  festi- 
vals      184 

Consecrated  times — New  view  of  them  in  Chris- 
tianity—Rise of  festivals— Confusion  of  Old 
and  New  Testament  .         .         .  184 

Weekly  and  yearly  festivals — Sunday — The  "dies 
stationum"  — Sabbath  — Fasts  — Yearly  festival 
—  Passover  —  Jewish  and  heathen  converts 
differ 185 

Anicetus  and  Poly  carp — Later  repetition  of  same 
controversies — Victor — Irenmus  .  188 

Quadragesimal  fast  —  Easier  —  Whitsuntide  — 
Christmas — 'EopTw  Tm  iTri^sLviaiy — Origin  of  the 
latter  festival     ".         .         .         .         .         190 

d)  Single  acts  of  Christian  worship        191 
Character  of  spiritual  worship  the  essential  mark 

of  Christian  service — Reading  the   Scriptures 
— Early   translations—  Interpretation — Preach- 
ing— Singing — Hymns — Sacraments  191 
On  the  sacraments  in  particular. 
^  Baptism. 
Preparation — li^Tn^cu/Aivct — Church  office  of  Ca- 
techists — Creed — Different  application  of  it — 
Learnt   by   heart — Public   confession   of    it — 
Form  of  renunciation,  afterwards   exorcism — 
Outward  Form  of  Baptism — Formula—Immer- 
sion— Clinici — Infant  baptism — General  recog- 


nition of  it  (A.  D.  250)— Late  baptism— God- 
fathers (Sponsores) — Symbolic  customs  at  bap- 
tism— Anointing —  Xu^cdsTiu  — Confirmation — 
Rise  of  confirmation — Privilege  of  the  bishops 
— Symbol  of  childhood  in  a  new  life — Bro- 
therly kiss — Baptism  of  heretics — Controversy 
on  this — Stephanus — (Cyprian — Dionysius  of 
Alexandria — Romish  Church  on  the  subject — 
North  African  Church        ...         193 

^  Supper  of  the  Lord. 
General  Remarks. 

View  of  its  foundation  by  the  Redeemer — Its  aim 
— Original  connection  with  a  general  meal — 
'Ayct^M  —  Degeneration  of  these  Agapce — 
Abuses — Judgment  of  the  Fathers  thereon  207 
Particular  remarks  on  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Prayer  of  praise  and  thanks — Original  idea  of  an 
offering  of  thanksgiving  —  Oblationes  —  The 
idea  of  a  sacrifice  at  first  only  symbolic — False 
notion  of  a  sacrifice — Use  of  common  bread — 
Daily  communion — Communion  every  Sun- 
day— Strangers,  sick,  and  prisoners,  receive 
consecrated  bread  and  wine — First  trace  of 
communion  under  one  kind — Infant  commu- 
nion          210 

Connection  of  the  Lord's  Supper  with  the  con- 
clusion of  a  marriage,  and  the  commemoration 
of  the  dead — Unevangelic  dispositions — "  Sa- 
crificia  pro  martyribus" — Festivals  of  the  mar 
tyrs — Extravagant  honour  to  them — Overvalue 
for  what  is  human     .         .         .         .         213 

The  Translator's  Preface         .         .        215 
SECTION  IV. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CONCEPTION  AND 
DEVELOPMENT  OF  CHRISTIANITV  AS  A  SYS- 
TEM   OF    DOCTRINES. 

1.  General  Introductory  Remarks  229—230 
Chrisianity    not   a   dead   letter,  but  a  life-giving 
spirit — Different  instruments  for  the  One  Truth 
—  Internal    Unity    of    Christianity — Develop- 
ment of  Christianity  by  means  of  controversies 
and  contentions         .         •         .         ,         229 
2.  History  of  Sects. 
Two  chief  divisions  of  the  religious  Spirit. 

a)  The  Judaizing  Sects  .        230—238 
Jewish  and  heathen  Christians — Peter  and  James 

— Paul — Four  parties ;  a)  Pseudo-Petrians  ; 
/2)  Genuine  apostolical  Jewish  (Christians;  y) 
Pseudo-Pauline  Christians;  J)  Genuine  apos- 
tolical Heathen  Christians  (Justin  Martyr.) 
New  Church  at  .-Elia  Capitolina  .  230 
Ebionites  —  Their  names  —  Different  kinds  of 
Ebionites — Difference  between  them — (Origen 
on  this  subject) — Representation  of  them  by 
Epiphanius — Difference  in  their  Christology — 
The  Clementine  on  this  subject — Their  ac- 
ceptance of  a  simple  original  religion — The 
theory  of  revelation  according  to  the  Clemen- 
tine— ^^Relation  of  Christianity  to  the  original 
religion — Relation  of  Mosaism  and  the  Gospel 
— The  asceticism  of  the  Ebionites — The  Na- 
zarenes  mentioned  by  Jerome     .         .         233 

b)  The  Sects  which  arose  from  the  mixture 
of  the  Oriental  Theosophy  with  Chris- 
tianity          238 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  COXTENTS.  461 

I.  The  Gnostic  Sects.  ,  Detached   consiJenitions    on    the    relijjioiis  and 

a)   General    introductory    remarks   on    the  j      moral  ideas  of  the  School  of  Basihdes—U 
origin,  character,  and  differences  of  these       '""•^  "^  t'^'th-Ethics  of  Basilidea-His  p 


Sects  ....        238—254 

•yyacTK  in  Christianity  —  Contrast  between  the 
TTrejjuuTiK'.i  and  the  ^^^t'*'-'  (=tc>.Xo() — Eso- 
teric— Exoteric  Religion — From  the  mixture 
of  old-oriental  views  of  Religion  with  those  of 
Neo-Platonism  a  'i'hcosophic  Christ  is  formeil 
— The  then  condition  of  the  Roman  Empire 
considered  in  reference  to  its  influence  on  the 
formation  of  these  systems         .         .         238 

Genetic  formation  of  Gnosis — a  peculiar,  ani- 
mating principle  in  it — Key-note  of  this  sys- 
tem— Suhject-maltcr  of  the  ideas  in  (inostic 
speculation — Relation  of  Christian  faith  to  this 
speculation — Idea  of  Emanation — Doctrine  of 
the  iEons — Theory  of  Evil — Dualism         242 

Alexandrian  and  Syrian  Gnosis  (the  latter  modi- 
fied by  Parsism) — Relation  of  both  these  ten- 
dencies to  each  other — Zabians  ,         244 

Essential  differences  between  the  various  Gnostic 
systems — The  points  of  agrc<'ment  in  all  Gnos- 
tics— ATaker  of  the  world  (Axfju'.u^ce) — Their 
views  of  the  Theocracy  of  carnal  and  spiritual 
Judaism.  Anti-Jewish  Gnostics — Their  views 
relating  to  the  Demiurgos  and  to  Judaism,  in 
which  they  departed  from  the  Jewish  Gnostics 
— between  the  JNew  and  the  Old  Testament — 
Contrast 247 

Ethical  differences — Antinomians — Special  dif- 
ferences— Concerning  Marriage — Concerning 
the  person  of  the  Redeemer  (Docetism)       249 

Classification  of  the  Gnostics  in  consequence  of 
these  differences — into  the  "sects  which  en- 
graft themselves  on  Judaism,  and  those  which 
oppose  themselves  to  it"     .         .         .         251 

Exegesis  of  the  Gnostics — Arbitrary  criticism — 
Their  theory  of  accommodation  in  an  exege- 
tical  point  of  view — They  wish  to  found  Chris- 
tian mysteries 2.51 

Means  by  which  Gnosticism  was  advanced — They 
were  called  forth  by  opposition  against  a  rude 
conception  of  Divine  things — Proper  mode  of 
considering  Gnostics  in  history    .         .         2.'J3 

B)  The  Individual  Sects. 
1.  The  Sects  whose  system  was  enan'afted 
on  Judaism         .      '.        .        254—280 

a)  Cerinthus. 
Contradictory  accounts  of  him — His  doctrines — 

His  view  of  the  baptism  of  Jesus — His  Chris- 
tology — His  views  on  Judaism — His  Chi- 
liasm 254 

b)  Basilides. 

Sphere  of  his  operations — Foundation  of  his  sys- 
tem— Doctrine  of  the  Divine  powers — O^doad 
— o^^i^-M — Theory  of  Emanation— Dualism — 
Parallel  members  in  the  opposition  established 
throughout  the  whole  cycle  of  the  world— Ge- 
neral process  of  purification — Metemjisychosis 
—Development  of  Life  in  Nature — His  ^t^x."'' 
— Doctrine  of  Providence,  and  the  Theoilica;a- 
Typical  view  of  Judaism— Supposition  of  writ- 
ten documents  of  the  wisdom  of  the  Patriarchs 
-On  the  Canon  of  the  Old  TesUiment— His 


par- 
tial asceticism — His  view  of  marriage  2C4 

c)  Valentinus  and  his  School. 

His  life,  and  formation  of  his  chararter — Relation 
to  Basilides — Mi\m — Pleroma— .Self-limitation 
of  the  Bythos — Horos,  and  his  mode  of  oixra- 
tion — Double  j-ici* — Three  gradations  of  Bring 
—Their  mutual  relations— His  Demiurg(>« — 
Nature  of  the  Tnwj,uxTi».'.i,  v>jk-a,  yv/_i>iif      265 

His  theory  of  redemption— The  Plastic  Soter — 
Relation  of  man  to  the  Universe — His  notion 
of  Inspiration — His  views  on  that  subject  in 
reference  to  the  Prophets  and  to  heathenism — 
Appearance  of  the  Soter — Psychical  Messiah — 
The  main  point  in  Redemption— X^/»-T<:tr/»-^5f 
■^.u^iK-.f  and  ;nr«/^«Tonc — Spiritual  priiie — Es- 
chatology — Syzygy  of  the  Soter  with  the  So- 
phia   208 

Distinguished  men  of  this  School. 

Heracleon — His  exegesis  of  St.  John — Alle- 
gorizing indications — His  opposition  to  maityr- 
dom  as  an  "  opus  operalum"       .         .         275 

Ptolemfeus — His  relation  to  Valentinu.'i — Letter  to 
Flora — Threefold  principle  of  the  Mosaic  Law 
of  Religion — His  typical  system — F.ists — True 
object  of  fasting         ....         27G 

Marcus — His  life — Character  of  his  doctrines — 
The  idea  of  a  Koyi^  tcu  cvtoc  refined  by  him  to 
the  utmost  point         ....         276 

Bardesanes — Life— Character  of  his  Gnosticism — 


He  attacks  the  doctrine  of  an 


'.«•'«,' 


nt\ — His 


doctrine  of  moral  freedom — He  seeks  traces  of 
truth  in  all  nations    ....         279 

2.  Gnostic  sects,  which  denied  the  connec- 
tion between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  between  the  visible  and  invisible 
worlds  ....  2S0— 290 
«)  Ophites. 

Distinction  I>etween  them  ami  the  Valentinian 
Gnosis — Their  Demiurgos — Jaldabiu)th — ic/s- 
ju'.^^'.t — Their  anthropology — Meaning  of  the 
Serpent — Their  view  of  the  fall — Christology 
— Ophitish  Pantheism — Its  practical  influence 
— Investigation  of  their  relation  to  the  older 
Oriental  systems  of  religion        .         .         260 

b)  Pseudo-Basilidians. 
Character  of  their  sect — Views  on  Cluist's  surter- 
ings  and  death — on  martyrdom  .         283 

c)  Sethites  and  Cainites. 
Anthro()ology  of    the   Sethites — Shameful  Anti* 
nomianisiu  of  the  Cainites         .         ■         284 

d)  Saturninus. 
His  Anthropology  and  Christology         .         284 

c)  Tatian  and  the  Encralites. 

His  life— His  conversion  to  Gnosticism— Fanciful 

ascetic  dis[)osition — Traces  of  n  use   of   AfK>. 

cryphal  (Jospcis — EyK^xriTH — Julius  Caiwianup 

— -Severiani       .         .         .         .         •         285 

I        /)  Eclectic,  Antinoraian  Gnostics. 


theory  of  Redemiition— Relation  of  the  Archon  ,  Carpocrates— His  religious  system^  woiked  out  by 
to  Christ — His  views  on  the  sufferings  of  J&sus  -  •  •  — 

—Doctrine  of  Justification  .         .         257 1 


his  son  Epijthanes— Doctrine  of  supreme  Unity 
—  Pantheistic    Mysticism —  Anlinomianism  — 
'2*2 


462 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


Corruption  of  St.  Paul's  doctrines — Carpocra- , 
tians  at  Same — Inscriptions  relating  to  this 
sect 287 

Antitacti— ProJicians    .         .         .         .         289 

Kicolaitans — Name  of  this  sect — Error  of  their 
founder — Nicolaus— Simonians — Their  Cory- 
pliffius — Simon  Magus  .  .  .  2U0 
^•)  Marcion  and  his  School. 

His  relation  to  Gnosticism — His  predominantly 
practical  disposition — His  sources  for  the  know- 
ledge of  genuine  Christianity — Literal  interpre- 
tation of  Scripture — His  contrast  between  ^/j-t/c 
and  ^v*a-/c— History  of  his  religious  education 
and  development — Seeds  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Demiurgos — Opposition  to  the  Old  Testament 
— His  abode  in  Rome — Acquaintance  with 
Cerdo — His  later  history — Accounts  of  his 
end — Representation  of  his  principles — Oppo- 
sition between  holiness  and  justice      .         29 1 

Doctrine  of  the  Demiurgos  and  man — Christology 
— Doctrine  of  Redemjition — His  Patripassian- 
ism  and  Docetism — His  view  of  the  "de- 
scensus ad  inferos" — Twofold  Messianic  king- 
dom   295 

Marcion's  ethics  and  his  asceticism — His  views 
on  the  Canon  of  Scripture  .         .         298 

Marcionite  Sects. 

Marcus — Lucanus — Appelles — Tertullian  on  the 
character  and  system  of  the  last— His  conver- 
sion to  the  faith         ....         299 
Additional  Remarks. 
On  the  Cultus  of  the  Gnostics. 

Marcosians — Caians — Baptismal  formula  of  the 
first — Use  of  extreme  unction  in  the  case  of 
the  dead — Marcion  against  the  "  Missa  fide- 
lium" — His  endeavour  after  a  primitive  Chris- 
tian of  cultus — No  vicarious  baptism  in  Mar- 
cion's system    .....         300 

II.  Manes  and  theManichees         302 — 317 

Character  of  Manicheeism — History  of  its  founder 
— Western  and  eastern  sources — Acts  of  Ar- 
chelaus  of  Cascar — Representation  of  his  doc- 
trines by  Scythianus  and  Buddas — Oriental 
sources — Education  and  development  of  Manes 
— Amalgamation  of  Parsism  and  Christianity 
in  him — He  gives  himself  out  for  the  Paraclete 
— Relations  of  this  public  appearance — His 
fate .302 

Doctrines — His  Dualism  and  Pantheism — Doc- 
trine of  the  Kingdom  of  Life,  of  the  Mother  of 
Life,  of  the  first  Man,  of  the  living  Spirit,  and 
of  the  Soul  of  the  World — The  struggles  of 
Ormuzd  and  Ahriman  in  the  process  of  purifi- 
cation of  the  physical  and  moral  world — Trans- 
ference of  Mithras  to  the  Christ  of  Manes — 
Mystical  natural  Philosophy — Christ  crucified 
in  nature — Origin,  formation,  and  nature  of 
man — Dominion  of  the  soul  over  the  Ckh — 
Allegorical  meaning  of  Genes.  U.,  III. — Des- 
tiny of  man — Original  corruption — Infant  bap- 
tism— Appearance  of  Christ,  the  Sun-Spirit — 
Christ  crucified,  a  mere  symbol — Last  fate  of 
evil — Sources  of  religious  knowledge — Mode 
of  treating  and  criticizing  Holy  Scripture — 
Faustus  the  Maiiichee        .         .         .         306 

Composition  of  their  religious  assemblies — Ex- 
oteric and  esoteric  doctrines — Electi,  Auditores 
— Orders — Use  of  the  Sacraments — Their  sign 


of  recognition — Festivals — Festival  of  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Manes — Their  moral  character — 
Persecutions  against  them — Edict  of  Diocle- 
tian against  this  sect  .         .         .         315 


Author's  Preface  to  the  Third  Part 
SECTION   V. 


319 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  FORMATION  AND  DE- 
VELOPMENT OF  CHRISTIANITY  AS  A  SYS- 
TEM OF  DOCTRINES  IN  THE  CATHOLIC 
CHURCH,  WHICH  FORMED  ITSELF  IN  OP- 
POSITION   TO    THE    SECTS       .  323 453 

I.  The  genetic  development  of  Church  The- 
ology in  general,  and  the  characteristic  of 
the  individual  religious  and  dogmatical 
dispositions  which  have  peculiarly  influ- 
enced it 323—357 

Relation  of  Christian  life  to  the  development  of 
doctrine — Opposition  to  Judaism  and  Heathen- 
ism, especially  against  Gnosticism.  Infiuence 
of  the  latter  on  the  development  of  Doctrine, 
especially  upon  the  settlement  of  Hermeneutic 
Principles.  Possible  mode  of  engrafting  it 
upon  what  there  is  of  truth  in  Gnosis  323 

Direction  and  tendency  of  the  Church  Theology 
derived  from  these  considerations — Realistic — 
Idealistic  dispositions         .         .         .         324 

Realistic  Disposition. 

Predominant  in  the  development  of  Church  The- 
olog)' — in  Asia  Minor — Poly  carp  of  Smyrna, 
Papias  of  Hierapolis,  Melito  of  Sardis,  Irenseus 
of  Lyons — also  in  the  Western  (Romish) 
Church 324 

Practical  Christian  disposition  of  Irenaeus — His 
controversy  with  Gnosticism       .         .  335 

Erroneous  turn  taken  by  this  Realism,  as  shown 
in  Montanus 326 

Montanus — Nothing  new  brought  forward  by  him 
— His  doctrines  farther  moulded  by  TertuUian 
— Character  of  Montanism         .         .         326 

Events  of  the  life  of  Montanus — His  peculiarity 
— Uncertainty  as  to  the  time  of  his  coming 
forward — His  appearance  explained — His  prac- 
tical errors — Montanislic  prophetesses — Pris- 
cilla,  Maximilla         ....         327 

Spirit  of  Montanism — Gradual  development  of 
the  Church  through  the  Paraclete — The  ex- 
tension and  completion  of  the  first  Revelation 
— especially  in  reference  to  life  and  moral  doc- 
trines, and  in  regard  to  the  defence  of  the  doc- 
trines which  are  attacked   .         .         .         329 

Opposition  of  Montanism  to  Church  views,  which 
clung  only  to  Outward  things.  Tertullian  on 
the  Church  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  Church  of 
the  Bishops — Idea  of  the  spiritual  priesthood 
of  all  Christians — But  a  confusion,  never- 
theless, between  the  old  and  the  new  Theo- 
cracy          330 

Prophets  of  the  Montanists — Idea  of  ecstasy  car- 
ried to  the  extreme — Controversies  concerning 
inspiration — The  opposite  extreme  (Origen) — 
Their  doctrine  concerning  the  last  outpouring 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  about  to  precede  the  return 
j       of  Christ  .         .         .         .         •         331 

j  Moral  doctrine — Their  aberration  from  its  true 
meaning — New  commandments — Their  asce- 
I      ticism — Fasts  commanded — Opposition  of  evan- 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OP  CONTENTS. 


4G3 


gelic  freedom  to  these  fasts — Their  views  on  , 
martyrJoni — On  marriage — Their  principles  in 
regard  to  penance  (Tertullian)   .         .         33C 

Zeal,  in  Tertullian,  against  an  exaggerated  re- 
verence for  martyrdom  —  Millenarian  doc- 
trines         331 

Outward  history  of  Montsinism — Circumstances 
favourable  to  its  advance — Its  opponents —  | 
Synods  respecting  Montanism — Concord  esta-  j 
Mished  by  means  of  Irena;us — His  mission  to 
Eleutheros — Later  opponents  ;  Praxeas — Mon-  l 
tanists  as  Church-party  in  separation  [i.  e.  a 
schismatical  party] — (Cataplirygians,  Pepu- 
zians) 334  I 

Violent  opponents  of  Montanism,  arising  from  a  I 
cold  intellectual  disposition — Alogi      .         336, 

Idealistic  disposition  in  the  Alexandrian 
Church 

Alexandrian  Catechetical  schools — Their  oiiginal 
intention  (Eusebius,  Jerome) — Activity  of  in- 
dividual catechists — Originally  only  one  Cate- 
chist — Origen  divides  his  office  with  a  second 
— Requisites  for  this  office — Clement  on  this 
point — Their  activity  furthered  by  tlie  founda- 
tion of  a  learned  normal  school  for  teachers  of 

the  Church 337 

Relation  of  the  catechetical  schools  to  different 
mental  dispositions  (to  the  Greeks,  to  the 
Gnostics,  and   to  the   Realists) — Their  Tvceri; 

AxxBm -338 

Relation  to  the  Gnostics— Difference  from  them 
in  their  theory  of  ttio-ti;  and  ■yvaxri; — Clement 
on  Pistis— Origen  ....  338 
Peculiar  Christian  feature  in  their  Gnosis — Its 
subjective  nature  and  objective  sources  of 
knowledge  (Clement)— Biblical  character  of 
their  Gnosis — Reproaches  against  them  for  re- 
quiring intellectual  attainments  and  culture — 
Clement  defends  them  for  requiring  these — 
Mutual  relations  of  Christianity  and  philosophy 
— Clement  alternately  mild,  and  severe  against 
the  adversaries  of  the  Alexandrian  Gnosis — 
He  defends  philosophical  study — One-sided 
view  of  the  Ante-Christian  condition  and  edu- 
cation of  man  on  the  part  of  his  opponent 
(Tertullian)— Clement  on  the  march  of  the 
development  of  the  Grecian  philosophy,  consi- 
dered in  the  light  of  an  education  ibr  human 
nature — On  the  relation  of  iiKiwinw  to  philo- 
sophy, and  its  weak  points — Philosophy  consi- 
dered as  a  point  of  transition  to  Christianity  339 

The  Alexandrians  began  to  consider  Christianity 
as  the  reconciliation  of  the  oppositions  caused 
by  human  one-sidedncss — Their  freedom  of 
spirit 345 

Intermixture  of  Platonism  and  Christianity  in 
reference  to  mim;  and  yvurK-  Trtrrit  a  subor- 
dinate condition         ....         346 

Point  of  connection  of  the  Alexandrian  yvc»9■^lKi( 
with  the  Gnostic  Tmu/uoLTMo;,  of  the  7r/(rT/«5c 
with  the  4t/;t(xic         .         •         •         •         346 

Difference  of  the  two— existing  certainly  but  not 
of  great  importance— Its  causes— Their  predo- 
minantly speculative  disposition,  and  the  opp<v 
sition  to  other  modes  of  conceiving  twt/;    347 

Consequences  of  this  separation  of  ytiurK  from 
TTij-Ti; — Theosophy    .         .         .         .     '    347 

Farther  advance  of  the  ideas  of  Clement  by  Origen 
— His  view  on  the  nature  of  faith  and  its  de- 
grees—Opposition to  faith  in  sight  (jyyi»fK)— 


False  explanation  of  St.  Paul's  cxpresnions— 
On  the  twofold  position  of  a  spiritual  and  a 
carnal  Christian — On  spiritual  Judaism  ami 
carnal  Christianity— On  the  deeper  sense  of 
Holy  Scripture  ....         34S 

Connection  of  this  theory  with  the  diiferent 
forms  of  revelation  of  iho  Logo* — Disiinrtioa 
of  the  predicates  of  the  Logos  in  reference  tt> 
his  nature,  and  what  he  is,  as  received  in  refe- 
rence to  redemjition — Origen  on  the  subordinate 
position — and  condescension  to  it— Disapproval 
of  a  contemptuous  pride    .  .         .         352 

Theory  of  diflerent  exegetical  positions  connected 
with  the  former  theory — Twofold  (>o:-ition — 
The  predominantly  speculative  spirit  leads  to  ati 
intermixture  of  Christian  ))hiIosophy  and  the 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith  .         .         3.53 

Subject-matter  [lit.  contents]  of  Gnosis — as  re- 
ceived by  Origen—Third  (and  more  exhorta- 
tory)  sense  of  Scripture— for  those  who  haJ 
not  attained  to  Gnosis — Supposition  of  myths 
in  Scripture— Application  of  this  principle  to 
the  New  Testament  .         .         .         3.').'> 

Explanation  of  the  views  of  Origen — Truth  and 
error  mixed  together  in  them— But  still  what  is 
historical  not  destroyed — Necessary  opjwsition 
to  these  views  in  Realism  ,         .         356 

II.    The   Development  of   the   great   doc- 
trines  of    Christianity    considered   sepa- 
rately ....        357— 1U7 
Theology. 
Poctrine  concerning  God — (Jod-consciousness  re- 
vived  in  Christianity — Uilferent  forms  of    its 
development — Controversy  of  the  Church  doc- 
trine with  the  superstitious  and  idolators — .Ap- 
peal to   the  original   God-consciousness — Cle- 
ment on  the  demonstration  of  the  existence  of 
God — Origen — 'J'heophilus  of  Antioch  on  the 
revelation  of  God  in  the  creation — Tertullian 
— Who  appeals  to  the  testimony  of  the  soul, 
especially  against  Marcion  .         •         357 
Nature  of  God — Realistic  conception  of  it — Ter- 
tullian— Confusion   between   corporeality  and 
existence — Spiritualization  of  the  Idea-of-God 
by  means  of  a  practical  disposition — Irenffus, 
Novatian.       Distinction    between    Anthropo- 
morphism and  Anlhropopathism — Truth  in  tho 
I       latter — Opposition  between  a  sensuous  human- 
1      izing  of  God  in  religious  Realism  ;  and  a  de- 
I      humanizing    of     him    in    Idealism — Peculiar 
nature   of   Marcian's   Anthropopathism — Ter- 
j      tullian  against  him — Endeavours  of  the  .Alex- 
andrians   to    spiritualize    Anthropopathism — 
Origen— Middle  way  of  the  .Mexandrians  l)e- 
tween  the  Gnostics  and  the  rest  of  the  Church- 

I      teachers 360 

Doctrine  concerning  creation — Cre.Uion  out  of 
I  nothing — In  opposition  to  the  reliijions  of  na- 
ture [deification  of  nature] — Maintenance  of 
I  the  Incomprehensible  as  such  against  s[>ecula- 
I  tion  and  poetry  [imaginative  views] — Cluis- 
1  tianity  purifies  religious  faith — .Misconcejjtion 
i      of  this  doctrine  by  the  (inosticjj  .  363 

I  Doctrine  of  Hennogenes — DilTercnrc  and  coin- 
i  cidence  of  bis  turn  of  mind  with  ihnt  of  the 
Gnostic-s — His  controversy  against  the  emana- 
I  tion-<lo<triric  of  the  Gnostics — Tertullian  ron- 
I  cerning  him — His  doctrine  of  evil — L)educo«l 
j  from  natural  necessity — Eternity  of  two  princi- 
ples— God  tho  forming  principle — His  incon- 


464 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


sistency  in  the  notion  of  a  progressive  forma- 
tion of  matter — Theotloret  concerning  him — 
Irenseus  and  Tertullian  against  these  disposi- 
tions          365 

Peculiar  system  of  Origen — Engraftment  on  the 
Church-doctrine,  and  union  of  speculation  with 
it — Impossibility  of  a  transition  from  not- 
creating  to  creating— Origen,  an  opponent  of 
the  Gnostic  emanation-system — Supposes  a 
spiritual  beaming  forth  of  God — Eternal  Be- 
coming— His  opponent  Methodius — Weakness 
of  his  objections         ....         366 

Origen's  doctrine  of  the  omnipotence  of  God — 
Platonizing  view  of  it — Importance  of  this 
doctrine  in  his  system         .         .         ,         367 

Doctrine  of  the  Trinity — Peculiarity  of  Chris- 
tianity in  the  recognition  and  worship  of  God 
as  Creator,  Redeemer,  and  Sanctilier — Import 
of  this  doctrine — Different  modes  of  conceiving 
the  Triune  God — Mischief  arising  from  the 
mixture  of  speculative  and  dialectic  notions 
with  the  practical  element  .         .         368 

Idea  of  the  Logos — Engrafting  on  the  previous 
ideas  derived  from  Wt.  Paul  and  St.  John — 
Union  of  the  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ 
with  existing  speculative  ideas — Two  different 
dispositions,  already  existing  among  the  Jews— 
The  Church-doctrine  engrafts  itself  on  the  one, 
while  the  other  comes  forward  to  oppose  the 
Church-doctrine,  and  thus  furthers  its  develop- 
ment          369 

The  opponents  of  the  Church-doctrine  endeavour 
to  maintain  firmly  the  Unity  of  God  (//ovitp;^^/^) 
— Dilference  in  the  application  of  this  tfieory 
to  Christ — Two  classes  of  Monarchians  de- 
rived from  this  source — The  first  proceeding 
from  a  dialectic  and  critical  turn  of  mind,  the 
second  from  a  practical  and  Christian  370 

The  second  class  of  Monarchians  more  sharply 
opposed  to  the  first,  than  to  the  Church-doc- 
trine—from  a  peculiarly  Christian  leaning-- 
Patripassians— Origen  concerning  them       371 

Praxeas,  a  Patripassian — His  life — His  doctrine 
of  the  Logos — Two  views  concerning  it  pos- 
sible, according  to  Tertullian      .         .         371 

Doctrines  of  Noetus — Theodoret  and  Hippolytus 
concerning  him  ....         372 

First  class  of  Patripassians-'First  traces  of  them 
—Their  founder  Theodotus— Artemon— Arte- 
monites— Christology  of  the  two  parties— Ex- 
planation of  the  Artemonite  disposition       372 

Alogi— Whether  they  belong  to  this  class— First 
trace  of  them  in  Irenseus— I'races  in  Epiphanius 
—Inquiries  into  the  nature  of  this  party— Con- 
nection between  the  Alogi  and  the  Theodolians 
according  to  Epiphanius— Their  opposition  to 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  and  the  Old  Testa- 
ment         374 

Paul  of  Samosata— Ambiguity  of  his  character- 
Accusations  against  him — Zenobia,  Queen  of 
Palmyra,  favours  him — He  uses  this  connection 
for  worldly  objects— He  favours  the  acclama- 
tions of  the  people  in  the  Church — Changes 
the  Church-hynyis,  apparently  from  dogmatical 
grounds— His  doctrine  of  the  Logos— Reference 
which  he  gave  to  tlic  name  of  the  "Son  of 
God" — He  was  in  the  habit  of  concealing  his 
theological  views— Fate  of  Paul  .         376 

Last  class  of  Monarchians  (a  third  class,  which 
stood  between  the  two  already  mentioned)  — 
Bcryllus  of  Bostra— Eusebius  concerning  him 


— Agreement  between  Origen  and  Eusebius — 
Origen  persuades  Beryllus— Spirit  of  modera- 
tion in  the  Alexandrian  School  .         .         378 

Sabellius  engrafts  his  doctrines  on  those  of  Be- 
ryllus—Sources  of  his  doctrine  according  to 
Epiphanius— His  Monas  and  Trias— His  doc- 
trine of  the  Logos — The  spiritual  personality 
of  the  Logos  considered  as  an  hypostatized 
emanation— Denial  of  an  eternally  enduring 
personality— Final  return  to  the  Monas        379 

Church-doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  in  opposition  to 
the  Monarchians — Opposed  views  of  the  West- 
ern and  Eastern  Churches— The  Alexandrians 
— Origen — His  doctrines  taken  collectively — 
His  views  opposed  both  to  Gnostics  and  Mo- 
narchians— Opposed  to  the  transference  of  the 
idea  of  time  to  the  Logos — To  sensuous  repre- 
sentations  and  expressions  in  regard  to  genera- 
tion— Opposed  to  o/j.zwT-t'iv,  in  favour  of  the 
absolute  pre-eminence  of  the  Father — Prac- 
tical consequence  of  this  doctrine  in  regard  to 
prayer      ......  381 

Comparison  of  Tertullian  with  Origen — Con- 
demnation of  the  o/jLoma-m  by  the  Council  of 
Antioch 385 

Seed  of  a  controversy  between  the  Origenistic 
system  and  that  of  the  Romish  Church — Letter 
of  Dionysius  of  Rome  against  'o/ji.o'.v7i',v — His 
moderation 386 

Doctrine  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost — Imperfect 
ideas  on  the  nature  of  Spirit — The  idea  of  a 
personal  substantial  Being  is  firmly  maintained 
— Justin  Martyr — Origen  .         .         386 

Anthropology. 

Doctrine  concerning  human  nature — Its  peculiar 
importance  in  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  Re- 
demption—  Pneumatology —  Connection  with 
Anthropology — Neglect  of  what  is  of  import- 
ance in  a  Christian  and  practical  point  of  view 
among  the  Gnostics — Church-doctrine  in  oppo- 
sitidn  to  them — In  reference  to  evil     .         387 

Contrast  between  the  North  African  and  the 
Alexandrian  teachers. 

North  African  Church — Tertullian's  doctrine — 
His  peculiar  theory  of  the  propagation  of  the 
first  corruption — Tertullian  on  sinfulness — Op- 
position against  the  division  of  the  soul  into 
(xKoyov  and  Kzytucv — Against  the  Gnostic  doctrine 
of  different  elementary  principles  in  human 
nature — Tertullian  on  grace  and  free  will — No 
irresistible  grace         ....         388 

Alexandrian  Church — Clement  against  the  North 
African  doctrine — His  Anthropology — Peculiar 
system  of  Origen — He  endeavours  to  derive  all 
differences  from  moral  freedom — Vacillating 
views  of  Origen  hereon,  in  respect  to  the  origin 
of  evil 388 

Origen  against  Traducianisni  and  Crelianisni — 
He  teaches  the  pre-existence  of  souls — Allego- 
rical explanation  of  the  narrative  concerning 
Paradise — The  doctrine  put  forth  in  the  book 
"■*?'  'g;t'*"'  respecting  the  degradation  of  fallen 
souls  in  the  bodies  of  animals  afterwards  given 
up — Theory  of  a  process  of  purification  in  op- 
position to  the  notion  of  a  cycle  in  the  wander- 
ings of  the  soul — Three  principles,  according 
to  Origen,  in  the  fallen  nature  of  man — Their 
characteristics 392 


AXALYTTCAL  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


A(\i 


Christoloc;y.  1 

Doctrine  about  the  Reilccmor — Dcvclopinont  of 
this    doctrine — Realistic-Christian    disposition  ! 
called  forth  by  opposition  to  Gnostic  systems — 
Especially  by  opposition  to  Uocetism — Iprnatius 
of  Antioch — Tcrtullian — Doctrine  of  Clement,  | 
corrupted  by  Neo-Platonism  (the  u.T«5ai  of  the 
Redeemer) — Doctrine  of  Iren.TUS — Justin  Mar- 1 
tyr — In  his  system  the  Logos  takes  the  place  of 
a  soul— TertuUian  on  the  proper  human  soul 
of  tlie  Redeemer         •         .         .         .         393  ■ 

Influence  of  OriG;en  on  the  Church  system  of  doc- 
trine— His  ctVorts  for  a  systematic  foundation 
of  this  doctrine — DifTcrence  between  the  T'.TJu^t 
and  the  -I'^X"  '"  ^'hrist — The  Redeemer's  soul 
an  instrument  for  the  communication  of  life — 
His  doctrine  of  the  nature  of  the  body  of  Christ 
— His  influence  on  the  formation  of  the  Church- 
doctrine — The  Oris^enistic  view  bronccht  for- 
ward aijainst  Ber\'llus  of  Bostra — Objections  ! 
to  the  doctrine  of  Origen  .         .         .         395 

Doctrine  concerning  Redemption — Character  of 
the  doctrine  at  this  period — IS'egative  and  posi- 
tive side  of  the  doctrine — Both  these  points  ■ 
used  against  Docetism — In  the  doctrine  of  , 
Irenreus  the  latter  pcint,  in  that  of  Justin  Mar- 
tyr the  former  predominant — peculiar  theory 
of  redemption  in  Origcn — His  view  of  the 
magical  operation  of  the  sacrifice  of  a  guiltless 
one  ......         397 

Doctrine  concerning  faith — Connection  between 
redemption  and  sanctification — irSubjective  ap- 
propriation of  redemption  —  Individual  wit- 
nesses of  the  original  Christian  conviction 
and  consciousness  [Bcwusstsein] — Clement  of 
Rome — Irenaius  on  law  and  faith — The  Paul- 
ine notion  of  faith  obscured — Judaizing  view 
of  it — False  notion  among  the  (Jnostics — Mar- 
rion — Fundamental  idea  of  the  Church-doc- 
trine— Disturbed  by  interchange  of  outward 
and  inward  things     ....         399 

Doctrine  concerning  tlie  Church. 

Doctrine  concerning  the  sacraments — Obscurity 
concerning  the  relation  of  the  divine  thing  to  the 
outward  token — a)  Baptism— Irenajus — Tertul- 
lian — Confusion  between  outward  and  inward — 
Its  practical  prejudicial  consequences — Satisfac- 
tion for  sins  committed  after  baptism,  by  means 
of  penances  and  good  works — Cyprian~6)  Sup- 
per of  the  Lord — Doctrine  of  Ignatius  of  An- 
tioch— Justin — Irenaus — TertuUian — Belief  in 
the  North  African  Church,  in  a  supernatural 
sanctifying  power  of  the  token — Doctrine  of 
the  Alexanilrians — View  of  Origen — His  doc- 
trine of  the  symbol  in  the  Sacrament  400 

Eschatology. 

Doctrine  concerning  the  last  things— (.'hiliasm— 
Conception  of  the  idea  of  a  millennial  kingdom 
—Sensuous  Chiliasni  of  Papias  of  Hierapolis 
—This  is  puritied  and  spiritualized  in  the  case 
of  Ircna^us— It  never  belonged  to  the  general 
doctrines  of  the  (Jhurch     .  .         .         404 

Antichiliastic  disposition— Opposition  to  Montun- 
isni— 'i'he  presbyter  Cuius  against  Produs— 
Influence  of  the  learned  views  of  the  Alexan- 
drians on  the  spirilualization  of  the  ideas  of 
the  kingdom  of  (Jod  and  Christ— Sensuous 
Chiliasm  in   Egypt— Defended  by  Nepos  of 

59 


iNomos,  and  advanced  by  Korakion — Motlera- 
tion  of  Dioiiysius  of  Alexandria  in  CDnlrovort- 
ing  this  error — His  work  ti^/  »Ta)}i>j»i— Judg- 
ment concerning  Xe|Xis     .         .         .         -IO.t 

Doctrine  concerning  the  Resurrection — Views  of 
the  Gnostics — A  carnal  conception  oppt>si\l  to 
this  view — Interchange  [Verweehselung  !  Re- 
conciliation] of  the  o|>posite  extremes  in  Ori- 
gen ......         40»! 

Doctrine  of  the  restoration  of  all  things — Theorv 
of  Origen loV 

III.  History  of  the  most  relebratod  ^'luirch- 
teachers  ....  4(l7 — ^1.'>;j 
Apostolical  Fathers — DilTerence  l>etween  their 
writings  and  those  of  the  Apostles — \\'ritings 
of  these  Fathers,  in  an  unsatisfactory  condi- 
tion   407 

Barnabas — The  Catholic  Epistle  not  written  i>y 
him — Alexandrian  spirit  in  that  letter — Fanciful 
remarks  in  it  alternately  with  pompous  ones — 
Tendency  of  the  epistle     .         .         .         407 
Clement  of  Rome — His  letter  to  the  Corinthian 
Church — Fragment  of  a  second — Two  letters 
under  his  name  in  tlic  Syrian  Church  (edited 
by  Wetstein) — Doubts  as  to  their  genuineness 
— The  Clementine — Apostolical  Constitutions 
counterfeited  under  bis  name      .  .  408 

Hermas — Pastor  Henna? — Doubts  as  to  its  genu- 
ineness    ......  109 

Ignatius    of    Antioch  —  Seven    epistles    to    the 

Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  and  to  Polycarp  410 

Polycarp   of    Smyrna — Epistle    to    the    Phili(>- 

pians        .         .         .         .         .         .         410 

Apologists — Occasion  of  the  defence  of  the  Chris. 

tians — Quadratus — His    Apology    lost — Euse- 

bius  concerning  him  .         .         .         41(1 

Aristides       .         .         .         .         .         .         4  H 

Justin  Martyr — Accounts  of  his  life  and  etluc;> 
tion — His  religious  development — His  activity 
as  a  preacher  of  the  Gos|h'1 — His  ApolojA-  to 
the  emperor — Occasion  of  the  first  ApoloL'v — 
Time  at  which  it  was  written — Whether  writ- 
ten in  the  time  of  Marcus  Aurelius — It  comes 
into   the   time   of    Antoninus    Pius — Peculiar 
ideas  of  these  .Apologies  on  Revelation  and  tho 
>.-/^«c   ff^me unTix.-.c — But   nothing  of  this    kind 
'       occurs  in  his  other  writings — His  "  Kvhortation 
to  the  Greeks" — Explanation  of  this  diflerencc 
I       — xc)^f  Tgsc  'Kxxie/stf — Treatise  rt^i  u:>iif)(its — 
1       Dialogus  cum  Tryphone  JudaH>— lu   uuthen- 
j      ticity   and   relation   to   the   other   writings  of 
Justin — Agreement  of  the  A  polonies  and  this 
;       Dialogue — Especially   in    tho   do<-trine  of  tli.- 
Logos   and    the     nvst/,t/<    <<)*-.v — Occasion    and 
cause  of  the  composition  of  Ibis   Dialogue — 
— Lost  work  of  Justin — Letter  on  the  rhar.ic- 
j      teristics  of  Christian  worship,  not  genuine — 
I       His  martynlom  •         •         •         .         411 

Tatian,  a  disciple  of  Justin — His  religious  deve- 
loijrnent— His  study  of  the  Old  'I'estatnent— 
!       Preparatory  to   tR4ieving — His  ad«lress  to    llie 

heathen "  >^ 

Athenagoras — Apology  to  the  emperor — Personal 
;       accounts  of  him — TriMtisc  in  defence  of  the 
resurrection        .  .  •  •  •  4  IS 

Hermias — His  ii-xn^w.t  tot  i;»  o/>.-.r;*a> — -^  vio- 
lent encniy  of  the  Greek  philosophy    .         4  l'» 
Theophilus  of    Antioch— A |)ologeliciil  work    by 
him  addressed  to  .\utolvcus — His  commentary 
on  the  Bible      .         .   '     •         •         •         '«''-* 


ANALYTICAL  TABLE  OP  CONTENTS. 


466 


Peculiar  character  of  the  Church-teachers 
of  Asia  Minor. 

Formation  of  the  Anti-Gnostic — Practical — Real- 
istic spirit— Hegesippus — His  Church  history 
— Hardly  an  opponent  of  Paul — Active  author- 
ship of  these  teachers — (Melito  of  Sardis) — 
Their  object — Claudius  Apollinaris      .         419 

Irenajus,  bishop  of  Lyons  and  Vienne— His  epis- 
tles to  riorinus— Irenaeus  no  Montanist — His 
chief  work  against  the  Gnostics — His  other 
writings — Exegesis  and  Hermeneutics  formed 
in  opposition  to  the  Gnostics— Epistles  of  Ire- 
najus  to  Blastus  and  Florinus     .         .         421 

Hippolytus,  a  disciple  of  Irenajus— His  residence 
—  His  writings — List  of  the  latter — His  woiks  j 
on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  and  the  Apocalypse  i 
— Against  thirty-two  heresies — About  Anti-  i 
christ,  and  his  7r^-^r^irrTw.v  rrgoc  ^Xi/i-eitv^y     423 

Peculiar  character  of  the  Church-teachers 
of  North  Africa. 

TertuUian — His  characteristics — Personal  History 
— His  conversion  to  Montanism— Wiiethcr  he 
remained  a  Montanist — Tertullianists  424 

Cyprian — Influence  of  TertuUian  on  him — His 
"  Libri  Testimoniorum"— Intention  and  aim  of 
this  collection 427 

[Commodianus  —  His  "  Instructiones"  — Written 
not  long  after  Cyprian's  time — His  strict  notions 
— Speaks  against  pride  in  martyrdom  as  an 
"  opusoperatum"]     ....         427 

Arnoljius — Account  of  his  conversion — His  apo- 
logetic work— Occasion  of  his  conversion — 
Time  of  the  composition  of  his  work  "  Adversus 
Gentes" 427 

Romish  Church. 

Its  original  poverty  in  Theological  respects — 
Caius  —  Novatianus  —  His  writings  —  Treatise 
concerning  the  Jewish  laws  about  food — Minu- 
cius  Felix— his  Apologetic  Dialogue    .         429 

Peculiar  character  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church-teachers. 

Pantfflnus  —Clement  of  Alexandria,  his  successor 
in  the  ofhce  of  (^atechist — His  writings— Of  an 
apologetic,  ethical,  and  dogmatical  character — 
His  Hypotyposes — The  rest  of  his  writings  430 

Origen — His  biography — Influence  of  his  father 
Leonidas  on  the  formation  of  his  religious  cha- 
racter— Influence  of  Clenxent  on  his  theological 
development — Origen  amidst  persecution— ^His 
place  of  refuge — His  controversy  with  Gnos- 
ticism— His  firmness  during  the  persecutions — 
His  asceticism — Misunderstanding  of  this  432 

Theological  formation  of  Origen — His  emjiloy- 
ment  on  the  Platonic  philosophy — -Justification 
of  this  study — Ammonius  Saccas,  his  teacher 
— Change  in  the  theological  turn  of  his  mind — 
His  free  spirit  of  investigation,  and  his  mild- 
nes.s,  particularly  in  refetcrfce  to  the  Gnostics 


in  Alexandria — (Ambrosius) — His  services  in 
the  cause  of  exegesis  and  criticism — He  divides 
his  office  of  Catechist  with  Heraclas  .         435 
His  activity  as  a  theological  teacher — Character 
of  his  lectures  on  the  explanation  of  Scripture 
— Active   participation    of    Ambrosius   in   his 
labours — His  expressions  with   regard   to  the 
object  of  his  Libours — His  commentary — His 
work  vi^i  i'^X'^v — His  endeavours  for  the  party 
of  the  Church  zealots — His  relations  with  De- 
metrius of  Alexandria — Jealousy  of  the  latter 
towards  him — Origen  ordained  a  presbyter  at 
Cffisarea — Persecution  of  Origen  by  the  bishop 
— First  and  second  synods  against  him — Ex- 
communication of  Origen  in  the  last  of  these 
— Causes  of  these  persecutions — One  cause  of 
them  the    dogmatical  views  of    Origen  [dog- 
matik] — His  expressions  with  regard  to  those 
who  charged  him  with  heresy — His  writings  ad- 
dressed to  the  synod  in  his  own  defence       437 
His   activity   in    Palestine — Exhortation   to   the 
confessors — His  change  of  residence — Correc- 
tion of    the  Alexandrian  version — Hexapla — 
His  conduct  in  this  matter  defended  by  himself 
— His  interchange  of  letters  with  Julius  Afri- 
canus,  and  his  prejudices  in  regard  to  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Church — The  rest  of  his  writings 
— His  influence  on  the  controversies  relative  to 
the  doctrine — His   steadfast  confession  during 
the  Decian  persecution — His  death      .         440 
Continuation  of  the  Origenistic  School — Disciples 
of    Origen — Heraclas — Dionysius  of   Alexan- 
dria— His   letter   to    the   Bishop   Basilides   in 
Egypt — Pierius  and  Theognostus,  teachers  of 
the  Alexandrian  Church — An  Origenistic  and 
an  Anti-Origenistic  party  in  Egypt     .         445 
Hieracas,  the  ascetic — His  allegojizing   exegesis 
and  ascetic  bias — His  disapproval  of  marriage 
— Participation  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  a 
consequence  of  severity  and  strictness  of  moral 
observances — His  views  on  the  middle  state  of 
Children  [in  the  world  to  come]  and  on  the 
Trinity     ......         446 

Gregory  Thaumaturgus — His  parentage  and  edu-. 
cation — His  acquaintance   with    Origen    leads 
him  to  Christianity — His  language  concerning 
the  Exegesis  of  Origen — His  departure   from 
his  master — Origen — Epistle  of    the   latter  to 
Gregory — His   activity   in   Neo-C£esarea— His 
writings   ......         449 

Methodius,  bishop  of  Olympus — An  opponent  of 
the  Origenistic  school — but  an  illogical  one — 
His  writings      .....         452 

Pamphilus,  presbyter  at  Caisarea  in  Palestine — 
Defends  Origen.     He  is  the  founder  of  a  theo- 
logical school,  especially  for  exegesis — His  work 
in  defence  of  Origen,  written  in  conjunction 
with  his  scholar  Eusebius  .         .         452 

Theological  school  at  Antioch — Of  great  import- 
ance in  an  cxegetical  jjoint  of  view — Dorotheus 
and  Lucian        .         .         .         .         .         4.03 

I  General  conclusion  in  regard  to  this  period       453 


Date  Due 

CC193 

f) 

